- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Discussions
Hi there! Thanks to JY and the 7Sage community, I scored a 168 on the September 2018 LSAT (an 18 point improvement from my diagnostic score). While I wait for my law school decisions and such, I would love to help 1 or 2 7Sagers, ranging in the 150 - low 160s, with the LR section. Though not an expert, I went from missing 20+ to missing 4 on the official test for this section. During our sessions, we will focus on blind review and habit-building strategies. You’d have to have a flexible schedule or be available Saturdays 3pm - 5pm/Sundays 4pm - 6pm PST. If you’re interested, message me your current PT breakdown and how many months you’ve been studying.
Thanks and happy studying,
Ann
I'm confused as to why 6 (d) is wrong. Photography freed painters from the preconceptions in the impressionistic style, allowing them to pursue abstract arts. So, I'd think the painters were less limited?
I'm confused about JY's explanation for 25 B. Why can't we infer that temperature was lower before 1945 compared to the early 1980s? We have proof, lines 52-53 that says that in the 1980s, the land warmed slightly. Yes, "slightly" can mean 0.00001+ degrees, but we can still infer the temperature was higher in 1980s to some degree.
Man, D is such a stretch. Even if people with lower income are more likely to purchase older cars, does that mean they are purchasing older cars?! I would haven chosen it if the answer choice said "drive" instead.
Hmm.. interesting. I think there are two apparent flaws with the stimulus. First, the stimulus uses past evidence to predict a definite future. Second, it utilizes the part to whole flaw.
Luckily, I was able to spot the gap and chose B without hesitation timed. But, now during blind review, I'm having a hard time finding a reason to eliminate C because intuitively, C sounds good. So I'm going to attempt to articulate why C is wrong, besides the fact that it does not properly bridge the argument.
Refresher: As JY said, C is refering to a specific subset of the population [people who tune into the first episode and become loyal viewers]. Most of these people have not tuned in because of the television network's advertisement.
Negation: Most of these people have tuned in because of the television network's advertisement.
The negation should effectively destroy the argument, but in this case it doesn't. Let's say that the whole population of [people who tune into the first episode and become loyal viewers] is made up of 5 people. The television network's advertisement attracts 3 of these people. So what? The argument is about the advertisement's effectiveness (compared to advertisements favored by program's producers) to attract these people. So even if the television advertisement attracts "most" of these people, the advertisements favored by the program's producers would have attracted MORE (4 or 5 people). Therefore, C is unnecessary.
For 26, I eliminated C because the answer choice mentions oxygen rate, without relating it back to the subtraction method. Let's say the baseline measurement for the amygdala was high and the subsequent measurement was the same. With the subtraction method, the net is 0. So how can we say that the amygdala at the time was most metabolically active?
In a way, isn’t the existence of great artworks affecting the amount of aesthetic fulfillment derivable from contemporary art correct because the stimulus states that people can't derive more aesthetic fulfillment from contemporary art due to the current max? More than max is still an amount. Confused, help appreciated!
For 15, how do we know that the resource-procurement model was widely accepted?
For 16, I thought C was incorrect because it is only true in the case of clinical equipoise. But this is an "according to the passage..." question, meaning that the answer is what the author believes to be true. The author is in favor of clinical equipoise and believes C to be true based on lines 50-53.
But for 9. can the "at all" part be supported by line 40?
-edit-
It is supported because we're only talking about the group that omits this perspective.
I got hung up on d, but d's just saying that the argument is employing circular reasoning!
Breakdown: Businesses use surveys to improve profits. Oddly, profits declined in most businesses that used surveys but not in most businesses that did not use any surveys.
A. Which business increased in profits? We have no idea. We just know that the profits did or did not decline.
B. Ok, but this doesn’t resolve anything!
C. This gives us another reason for the decrease in profits!
D. Does it really make a difference if people respond 99% vs 100% accurately to the questions?
E. If the businesses that conducted surveys didn’t analyze the results, it would put them in equal footing with the businesses that didn’t conduct surveys at all. It wouldn’t explain why there is a dip in their profits.
Breakdown:
Context : Obscure unnecessary rules → quibble → unworthy of public confidence ; Code is widely accepted
P: Success → public confidence
C: We need to adopt an alternate code.
A. I wasn't entirely sure what intermittent meant when I took this timed. Regardless, I was able to eliminate this answer choice because it doesn't really do much for the argument. We want to look for an answer choice that weakens the link between P + C. A doesn't do this because we've already accepted that there are number of problematic rules in the traditional code. So who cares if it is intermittent or not?
B. Ok, so what if there is another motive to adopt the alternate code? It might still increase public's confidence.
C. Yup! If there are revisions to the traditional code addressing the problematic rules, is there really a need to adopt the alternate code? This weakens the bridge between P + C.
D. Really attractive trap answer choice. I think this attacks the premise. Generally, we shouldn't supposed to attack the premise.
E. I had to read this answer choice twice because of its use of referential phrasing. So it's saying for alternate codes, most of the provisions are not obscure (since few = most are not). This would actually strengthening the argument.
Ugh I thought 22. A was opposite of what Dost thought. Is NOT INDEPENDENT means that reality is DEPENDENT on experiences of individuals. Tricky wording
Ahh I remember reading Crime and Punishment in high school. Nice throwback!
Breakdown:
Paragraph 1:
Low resolution - 3 different positions.
MP - There are 2 opposing directions in Russian literary criticism: 1. art is above the present 2. art should be useful. D took a third position, in which reality was understood to be deeper and more than the tangible.
Paragraph 2:
Low resolution - Def. a reality.
MP - D believes reality is subjective and the writer's purpose is to make it so the readers believes it to be real.
Paragraph 3:
Low resolution - Def of artistic.
MP - D believes that literary work → artistic merit. Fulfill goal → fully realized work. According to D, art does not need to serve a political view.
Paragraph 4:
Low resolution - Art doesn't need to be useful.
MP - Critics believe that art must be useful, D says not necessarily so.
Thank you all for reaching out! -- I am fully booked at the moment.