This isn't a technique or anything, but something that has helped me is just reading a book that I really love for like 10 minutes before I take an exam. It helps me get into the rhythm of reading. Kinda cools my nerves a bit.

Ya, I am going to be taking the sep and oct tests, and the schools I am applying to all still consider that time range for early admission scholarships. Best of luck!

Not sure exactly what would help you the most, but what has helped me with understanding is to take a pencil to the screen and trace along the passage as you read. This will force you to see each word. Then think about how it connects to the past sentence and how it will probably continue into the next sentence. Lastly, just remembering that all LSAT questions are designed to be able to be understood by someone in under two minutes, so when something feels crazy complex, most the time it is just something little you are missing. It makes it feel a little less scary that way, at least for me.

ya there is a CC button on the bottom right side of the screen that you can click to toggle it off and on. If it doesn't appear for you, just reload the page a couple of times.

Thanks!

Well I guess that means you win. It was rude of me to make that quip about your comment originally. I thought it would be clever and funny, but it was at your expense, and that wasn’t nice of me. You are probably stressed out about this exam like I am, and don’t need people being mean to you. So I apologize. And yes, I changed my username and photo bc I realized that it made me a target, and I would rather not have that. I guess this saga is finally over, maybe?

No bro don't give up!

These have historically been one of my weakest question types. However, the argument analysis that we have done in previous lessons prepared me pretty well for them now. My suggestion for getting unstuck is just going back through a lot of the past questions in the Core Curriculum to reread the passages, don't bother looking at the answer choices. While reading them, just state what each sentence is doing for the argument. The key here I think is quantity. You have to do a lot of this in order for it to start making sense in your head. It's just an intuition thing that is built up over time, but can totally be built up. Best of luck!

"and we are going to call the excerpt... excerpt"

"The judges are not basing their judgements off entirely arbitrary criteria."

Because the conclusion only relates to how well drivers will drive, this pretend answer would still not be a correct NA right?

What has helped me is trying to read really slow. Like way slower than you think is possible. One word at a time, move through the passage and each answer. Just do this until you can start getting a feel for the grammar and logical indicators. I feel like with these problems it is difficult to utilize any trick other than just having a good understanding of the exact words being used.

I’m impressed that I was actually able to rage bate you into doing my little problem lol

Haha reading that was good for some laughs. I would return the favor, but I, however, have to study and not just spend time trolling the comment sections of 7sage instructional videos. Peace out dude✌️

I think I understand what you are asking, but if I misunderstood sorry. Okay so say we have the rule "Any measure that reduces the rate of traffic accidents should be implemented." We could take a look at Nebraska, should we implement it there? Yep. Take a look at Kansas, should we implement it? Yep. Keep going until we have reached every single place that falls within our domain of high speed straight roadways. We will then find that we have attempted to enact that measure universally, i.e. everywhere that falls under our domain. Does that make sense?

My advice would be to get so familiar with contrapositives that seeing a conditional is the same thing as seeing a contrapositive. This only happens after a lot of drills that you most often create yourself. Otherwise the lsat will catch you lacking at one point or another. Additionally, often taking the contrapositive will not be very intuitive based on the specific wording (having to negate the word neither for example, it works but might be kinda confusing) and if you don't have extensive experience with contrapositives and negation this most likely either make you answer wrong or be a time sink. Moral of the story, contrapositives suck.

I think that is the point. A low res summary is supposed to get you to ask more questions and then dig up more information. Putting down "only relevant facts" could work, but I feel that the reason why "only relevant facts" was stated in the passage is lost, which was to support the fact that they are better than textbooks. It is kinda like the difference between a premise/sub-conclusion and the conclusion in LR.

By focusing on the more general element, you are able to put more of the details of the section inside the box. If you get more detailed with the low-res summary it becomes more difficult to fit all the details in the box. Then when you need to reference that part, you can open that box and remember the details. Not to say it's impossible, but generally it makes it more difficult.

"engaging in shenanigans" lol

"invaluable... which means valuable"

ah that's so true, and also really encouraging! thank you for the extra motivation break

Much like modern-day string theorists, you seem to be desperately holding onto an antiquated and widely rejected theory. So people probably shouldn't listen to this opinion of yours.

Can you strengthen/weaken this analogy? Lmk how it goes without using JY's situationally convenient rules ;)

Home lighting lobby x LSAC colab

actually sounds like the plot to an awesome movie - "A tragic figure, defying a curse placed on his family by the gods, leads his city into a battle that he realizes will prove futile."

only if you sacrifice your daughter

"it's not a hobby" REAL

That's super helpful, thanks for the advice!