Hi! I’m having a bit of trouble approaching my method of review w this section of the LSAT. I’ve been going through the curriculum and doing all the practice sets each section provides. I cant help but think that the best way to approach testing myself it to do drills repeatedly with with specific question types but I remember the advice they gave us saying that we should not exhaust all our study resources too quickly AND to not do one question type over and over again… does anyone have any advice on how to approach improving each question type?
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
Hi! What flaw could this be categorized as?
#help (Added by Admin)
Why cant we connect Lecturer+effective teacher ‑m→ eccentric straight to being a good communicator like this: Lecturer+effective teacher ‑m→ eccentric —> good communicator?
#help (Added by Admin)
Interested!!!
i think this is one of those questions where its much more efficient to eliminate as many answer choices as possible and weigh out which ones could be correct and wrong… I did not diagram but fortunately i got this one correct from doing that method.
I eliminated A and B because of the vocab they used… “some” is not acceptable in this situation although it may seem like it because of the first sentence but as JY said, if you catch that the grammar is actually saying that “actions —-> can only know some consequences” and not using some as the existential quantifier indicator, you can eliminate both A and B.
D is incorrect because it is irrelevant because the stimulus never talks about “immediate actions”
And E is incorrect for the same reason. The point of the stimulus was not this. And thus, C is correct because it has the most to do with the stimulus and at least ATTEMPTS to fill a gap!! :D
I hope this helps.
Hello everyone! I’ve been improving on my reading ability on the RC section and have been absorbing and understanding the information much better in my drills. I find that my problem are the harder questions. Like I understand the passage well but the complex questions throw me off. Idk if that makes sense but does anyone have any tips on how to counter this?
this gave me so much hope!! Congrats! So happy for you (3(/p)
Would the flaw here be that the author is mistaking something that doesnt work in theory also does not work practically? Idk if thats a reach but from my understanding, the author says that determinism isnt real because we cannot fulfill one of the theoretical requirements for it (which is to calculate the sub-atomic whatever the hell they said). But the flaw is that even if we can’t calculate it IN THEORY, in reality, we cannot fully say it doesnt exist? I got this question correct i just want to make sure that im getting the reasoning behind it correct too.. any feedback would be much appreciated! Thank you <3 #help (Added by admin)
they’re totally doing what to Goku :)))))))))))
Definitely interested!!!
I have no particular advice because I am just about to take the LSAT too but I just want to commend you for not giving up and keeping it pushing. Truly truly inspiring and i want you to know you are not alone!! We are all pushing for something in our lives and the bigger the challenge is, in my opinion, the sweeter the reward. I am wishing you all the best on your journey and if anytime in the future i can help I definitely will!!!!! (3(/p)
sometimes i get this question type wrong bc i overthink bc the answer choices bc are too obvious… its suspicious….. -.-
The way i approach every question now is by questioning whether J.Y would say “why are u telling me this AGAIN?”
I STAY crying at these types of questions :)
Why isnt the flaw here that they are generalizing a certain trait from a very small portion of people..?
#help (Added by Admin)
following this to get tips too!