Prior to using 7sage I used khan academy. I recieved a 154 on my first ever test in Feb 2024 (with logic games). After studying for a month I took the exam again in March and recieved a 160. After that I decided to wait until May and then begin going through the 7sage curriculum. Today (June 30th) I took my first test since March after doing all of the cc and most of LR and I received a 161. I am incredibly discouraged and don't know what I am doing wrong. Has anyone else had this experience?
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
I am getting very frustrated that many of the questions that I got wrong on preptest 156 do not have explanations, they only have the option to "discuss." Does anyone know why this is and where I can find explanations? Also does anyone know if there's a way I can know before taking a preptest that I will not have explanations for each questions? #help #feedback
I thought the word drought was too strong to mean less rain
For question 17: #feedback #help, I feel like J.Y. is not acknowledging Sibley's response for AC C that "we must limit the number of degrees we choose to recognize by name." I assume that's why the LSAT creators put that as an AC. If anyone has any clarity as to why C is wrong I would love the help
My issue with A is that how do we know it's "most" and not half or some or a few
Does anyone have a better explanation for why C is correct? I am confused by the L → BD
I though D because less rain = less storms= less lighting
I think I can explain why C is correct.
In the most simplified sense, the stimulus is telling is that these regulations are expensive to follow which leads some people to have an incentive to not follow them, and therefore we should get rid of them because animals would not be harmed by the removal.
That should make you say wait wait wait.
To use a parallel situation, we have rules about where we should dump paint/chemicals. It's a pain and kinda expensive to follow the rules so some people just dump them down the drain anyways. Using the reasoning from the arument, it would follow that if we took away the rules on how to dispose of paint/chemical substances, the enviornment would NOT be worse off.
Just becasue not everyone is following a guideline due to its expense and incentives not to, doesn't mean that repealing it wouldn't hurt what it's intended to protect.
Here is C edited to reflect the stimulus:
C. It unjustifiably overlooks the possibility that even if certain factors (endangered species regulations) tend to produce a given effect (some people not following them due to negative incentives), they may be likely to produce stronger countervailing effects as well (still protect a TON of endanged species which cancels out the few people not following).