Discussions

ashleyk220487

Joined: Apr 2025
Subscription: Free

General · Site and App unavailable Nov 19 - UPDATE: Site and App are back up!

ashleyk220487

Friday, Nov 20 2015

So fast! Thanks for coming back. I need to review some logic lessons, lol.

General · Site and App unavailable Nov 19 - UPDATE: Site and App are back up!

ashleyk220487

Thursday, Nov 19 2015

So does that mean all of the videos are down? If I click on a game explanation before 8:30pm tomorrow and preload it, will it still work? Or are you moving all of the videos somewhere else? I am confused. I don't understand server stuff. Just freaking out because I am PTing and BRing tomorrow because it's my only day off :/

PrepTests ·

PT119.S3.Q24

ashleyk220487

Friday, Oct 09 2015

I'm still confused on the money does not exist question. How does the conditional statement end up ULB→MD? Doesn't the wording "needed to" = required and therefore introduce a necessary condition? I read it as "To make money disappear" all that is needed (required) is "universal loss of belief". So my translation ended up MD→ULB. If someone could please tell where my translation went wrong, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

LSAT

•

Saturday, Jan 07 2017

ashleyk220487

PT68.S3.Q23 - art historian: this painting

Hi everyone! For this question, I understand how answer choice B wrecks the argument, making it a solid necessary assumption. It was my original answer choice, but I thought I was being tricked at the back end of the test because it seemed like a sufficient assumption. Is it both? Can it be both? If it's not a SA, what am I missing? I hate NA vs SA.

Answer choice B provides the following as a necessary assumption ...

CW-->PBSEKW

The contrapositive of the above conditional plus the author's conclusion make this ...

not(PBSEKW)-->not(CW)

not(PBSEKW)

------------------------------------------------

not(CW)

Seriously, how is this not a SA? It is enough to make the conclusion valid. Please help!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-3-question-23/

LSAT · Official February LSAT Discussion Thread

ashleyk220487

Monday, Feb 06 2017

I see that a lot of people are saying that the 12 week game was really tough. I thought it was pretty easy because of one of the rules helped severely restrict it ... am I missing something? Did I completely misread that game and bomb it? It wouldn't be the first time ...

LSAT · PT68.S3.Q23 - art historian: this painting

ashleyk220487

Saturday, Feb 04 2017

Thank you!

General · Is today Grey Day? [YES!!!]

ashleyk220487

Wednesday, Mar 01 2017

Thank you so much 7sage! I hit 176 on my first, albeit delayed, LSAT! I couldn't have done it without JP's lessons and explanations! Sending out high score vibes to everyone else in the 7sage family!