For LR, try doing timed individual questions. Maybe open up an LR section, make it untimed. But with your phone, use a timer giving yourself about 1:20.
Then start your timer and read/answer question 1, and once your time runs out move on to the next question. If you are unsure of your understanding or answer choice, flag the question.
Repeat this same process until you get through all the questions!
You need to be able to distinguish the QT and know how to solve for it quickly, read the stimulus with good understanding, and answer the question to the best of your ability.
This drill helps you test your confidence and your skills under timed conditions. You need the experience of working under timing conditions.
Also, keep in mind that you don't need to answer every question on the LSAT. Skip questions and if you can't bring yourself upto speed with finishing all 4 LG games, 26 LR questions, and 4 RC passages in 35 minutes, maybe focus on finishing 20 LR, 3 LG passages, and 3 RC passages.
With high accuracy, you could get:
PT89 as an example:
LR: -5 (If you get all 20 LR questions correct + using C as your guess AC)
LG:-5 (If you get all 3 LG games correct + using C as your guess AC for game 4)
RC: -4 (If you get all 3 RC passages correct + using C as your guess AC for passage 4)
According to LSAT Flex Calculator: 166
Again, If aren't able to get yourself to finishing all questions on the LSAT, this is one approach you can take.
How is your LR and RC? Do you get through all of them? For me, I could never finish a full LR without feeling like I didn't understand the stimulus well enough. So I started just focusing on answering question 1-20 with high accuracy! Along with answer 3 RC passages with high accuracy!
This helped me a lot with breaking into the 150s
Anyone else thought it was pretty funny how reports said that ravens eat together, but as you keep reading you find that the ravens who eat together are a group who basically scares off the two mate pair? HAHA I loved LR stimulus sometimes
Hey if you don't have enough time to study and build your way to all 4 passages, why not do 3 passages in 35 minutes? Focus on accuracy.
For example if you focus on accuracy by giving yourself 35 minutes for all 3, you could get:
Passage 1: 7/7
Passage 2: 6/6
Passage 3: 8/8
Then for passage 4, you can guess all C's and maybe get like
Passage 4: 1/6 or 2/6
The will result in -5 or -6 on RC WITHOUT having to complete all 4 passages! Keep in mind that this will work if you are able to do all 3 passages with full accuracy. Honestly even if you miss a few in the 3 passages, you will still be able to do decently well!
Again, I don't know your LSAT goals nor when you will take the exam, but if it is in a few weeks and you still can't get to all 4 passages in spite of extra practice, I'd stick to 3 passages and make sure I aim fully understanding the passage and can find the answers with evidence to them!
It could really help! Same for LR and LG. Don't risk losing accuracy in order to get through all questions!
Hello everyone, I am struggling to get faster on the logical reasoning section. I usually get to question 16 and guess on the rest of them under timed conditions.
I usually miss like -2 on the 16 that I do answer, and maybe get like 1-2 from guessing C on the ones I don't get too.
I would really like to get to at least question 20. Any tips on how to improve speed for LR?
This argument is horrible. it's using monks as evidence of the common man in the medieval society.
B. Correct! It generalizes from a sample that is NOT representative at all! You can't compare one type of people with how all people are.
That is like saying like "People in the 20th century were energetic because soccer place in the 20th century were energentic". Okay well does that mean that ALL people were energetic? What if the rest of the population was lazy??
Main Conclusion: Find answer choice that translates the conclusion of the argument
Conclusion: The most rational public health strategy would place much more emphasis than at present on fully informing people about the transmission of diseases caused by microorganisms
(A): No, this is a premise that was used in support of the conclusion
(B): This is unsupported. We know that Microorgs are evolving, and in general can't be eradicated, but that doesn't mean that a specific person can't be cured of a specific disease.
(C):Correct, BINGO!!!!!! In the last sentence the expert believes that
there should be a change of strategy regarding microorganisms, and that idea matches the idea in this answer choice. It might not be specifcally what the conclusion said but it gets the gist of the conclusion that there is a good reason to make a change in how they handle public health.
(D): This was not mentioned and is way to strong of an answer choice. We have no idea if they will ever fall victim to it.
(E): Okay, but that is not the main point, the author is arguing for new change in how they handle public health.
AHH i got this wrong due to not understand the stimuls properly.
Weaken Question: Our job is to weaken the conclusion that is being made.
Conclusion: Manufacturers and retailers are wrong about personal computer not having a difficult set up
Premise 1: Customers must take responsibility working through mysteroius set ups and switches
Premise 2: Addition accessories require softwares that can stop things from working
Answer choices
A. What? Would this make it support our conclusion? Okat maunals can explain the switch but that doesn't mean that it will make it A LOT easier
B. Free? We are not worried about cost
C. Future? we don't care about the future
D. Correct!!! Bingo! If it's true that computer purchases usually comes with membership to expert installations and accessories, then who cares about all the pieces and parts???
The expert nerds will just come to your house and fix your computer stuff when you need it! If this answer choice is right, then the computer manufacturers are right; complexity isn't a problem.
E. Again, this almost seems to be strengthening the stimulus showing that complexity is an issue!
Thank you for sharing! I've been studying for over a year now, and trying different methods. Seeing that others have been successful helps with motivation!
Simplified Explanation:
Conclusion: There is a difference between beauty and truth.
My own thoughts after reading this, "But why is there a difference? What is causing this?"
Evidence 1: There is a difference because if there weren't ANY difference, then the most REALISTIC (Which we later find out most realistic is also most truthful) pieces of art would be the best as well.
My own thoughts after reading this, "Okay, so does that mean that the difference is that most beautiful art is the best? Since premise 1 said, " pieces of art would be the best as well"? Implying that most beauty is best. This might be the NA but lets keep reading.
Evidence 2: The most realistic pieces are the most truthful.
Evidence 3: Many of the most realistic (most truthful) are NOT among the best.
Loophole: Okay well are most beauty among the best? Becuase if the are not then why would there be a difference?????
Answer Choices:
A.Correct!!!!!!! Most beautiful artworks are the best". Ok lets negate. Few beautiful artworks are the best. If this is true it would destroy the argument's conclusion show that there is not really a difference between beauty and truth since many of both of them are not among the best artworks. So why should we conclude that there is a difference?
D. Wrong. Of negated, would NOT destroy argument and can still be that there is a difference between beauty and truth!!!
Negation Test: What if some beautiful art were not the best, could it still be possible, given the other premises, for truth and beauty to be different from each other? Yes, perhaps some beautiful art is not the best art, but the most beautiful art actually is the best; in that case, it could still be possible to show that the most beautiful is not the most truthful, and therefore beauty and truth could still be different. Thus, this answer choice fails to destroy the arguments conclusion are they can still be DIFFERENT!
For those stuck, here is an example:
C: One should buy a laptop from a manufacturer that offers a warranty, even if it means paying more.
P: Manufacturers WILL not offer a warranty if it means having to reimburse many people if the product was shitty.
Counterarguements:
-Ok so Manufacturers will not offer a warranty if it means they would have to return money back to buyers for a shitty product they produced.
But what if those customers don't even seek reimbursement in the first place even if the product is shitty? Then that takes away the incentives for even offering a good product. In this case, a manufacturer can still offer the public warranty and create a shitty product without the repercussions of reimbursing since not many people would seek their money back for shitty product.
NA: We need to assume that people would seek their money back for a product that sucked! This would scare manufactures from producing a half ass product that does not work to at least something function so they won't have to reimburse a lot of people!
In the end, no one would like to lose money on something they create and sell by eventually having to reimburse someone because the product did not work!
A. Correct! We need to assume that people are seeking reimbursement from a laptop with warranty!
I got this question wrong under timed conditions but after reviewing this, I realized how easy this question actually is. Well easy if you are quick at spotting numbers!
Stimlulus
60 different problems in the study
75% of the types of problems (NOT 75% of the PATIENTS) cleared up within 50 weeks of therapy.
Conclusion: 50 weeks of therapy is all that "MOST PEOPLE) need.
lol WHAT?!????????? Some LR questions make me laugh based on how ridiculous they sound haha
The Flaw
The issue is that what if majority of patients actually suffered from one type of problem, and that problem may or may not have been one of the 75% that was gone by week 50?
For example:
Imagine 75% of all people in the study actually suffered from major OCD, and lets say that OCD actually takes like 200 weeks to cure. This will be part of the 25% of problems that do not clear up within the 50 week period.
If this is true, then there is no way it is true that “most people” need only 50 weeks. If anything it would be the exact opposite to what the conclusion in the stimulus is trying to get at.
“Most people” in this scenario would require 200 weeks. This is the flaw of the argument.
B. Bingo! Correct, the argument fails to consider the possilbity that one of the 60 psychological problems stuided might be affecting MOST people such as in my example, "75% of all people suffering from OCD".
Can anyone explain why D is correct for question 8?
WTH was this passage lol I had like 6 minutes left for RC and this was my last passage and I went 1/7 :(
Me personally, I don't always get a headache during a PT. But when I do, I take an Advil. I also try meditating a few minutes before my exam! Also to warm up your brain, try doing past easy LG games just by drawing the game board and inferences! This will help in warming up your brain!
Best of luck!
I thought when it said "Samantha was the murderer, she would have avoided leaving behind footprints or fingerprints".
I thought this meant that if Samantha did not leave behind footprints, then she left behind fingerprints and vice versa.
So when I read that there were no footprints but there were fingerprints and they weren't Herberts, I thought to myself, "Bingo, they must have been Samanthas fingerprints because she leaves at least one of them at the scene'.
so when I moved to the answer choices, I made sure I found an AC that proved that it was Samanthas fingerprints and not Jansen's.
So I chose D. And I was wrong :(
Anyone else thought this passage was fairly difficult for a 1st RC passage? lol
Wow this Q was tough!
The expert is basically saying that a substance is addictive ONLY IF if stopping causes most users EXTREME psychological and physiological difficulty.
A -> WD
A. Wrong, just because it has the NC going first, does not mean that the SC will be the end result.
B. Ehh I felt that personally this AC was a stretch. It might be true, but it might also be false and the definition may bring about more addictive substances that I guess we didnt see it as a big problem? Right?
C. Correct!!!
C Is saying that a substance is addictive if most people can't stop using a substance without the extreme psychological or physiological difficulty. *
I know that C isn't saying this word for word because of the weird language, at first I thought this was going to be a contrapositive type of AC and that it would say non addictive if true for most people. But then it said "Only if that is not true for most habitual users". Which really threw me off!!!!
D. UM but did the person withdraw from the substance ever? What if once they started stopping taking the substance, they start to feel horrible psycholoigcal difficulty? Then it would make it addictive!
E. Impossible?? I mean IDK. How are we supposed to prove this based on the stimulus.
This was really helpful! Thank you for sharing!!
^
20. Main Point
This question is basically provided me the first half of the main point, all I had to do was complete the end. I got it wrong. I selected B. B is incorrect because although factually true, it was not the MAIN point The author’s main purpose were the 2 elements needed, which was basically the whole reason the author bothered to write this passage in the first place & providing OP explanations as context and then use a justification on why we need these 2 elements, which is something that one of the explanations lacked. A is correct because at the end, the author specifies that a proper explanation of mirrors must include 2 elements!
The reason I missed was because I did not focus my attention of “why the heck the author decide to write this”, rather focus on the validity of the explanations being used and weather they were valid or fully answered. My attention was focused on the wrong thing. The whole point is that the author wanted to advocate for something. Whether change or fix to something! Also a big clue was in the stimuli.
Solution: Read passage slower and anticipate MP by create a MP version in your head prior to looking at the question and answer choice options.
24. Purpose
The correct AC is D. I selected B. I had eliminated the rest of AC and stuck with B. However, one of the AC I eliminated was actually the correct AC. The reason I eliminated the AC was because I did not understand what it was saying. The reason B is incorrect is that the author never had “EMPIRICAL” data. The correct AC is D. The reason D is correct is that yes it was to point out that the 2nd explanation of front back is not sufficient in addressing issue!!!! RM: Eliminated correct AC due to lack of understand.
Solution: Eliminate if 100% know factually incorrect, if unsure keep so then can have a 50/50 situation and test/refer back to text for support of either or!
25. Author Agree (MBT) Perspective (Global Reference)
For this type of question, the correct AC will pass the Fact Test & be confirmed by the passage. I selected the wrong AC. I selected B. The reason B is wrong is because it has not support. The author never specifically stated that they “fail”. It is too broad!
I was able to narrow it down to B & C. C was the correct AC. C is correct! I did not understand the language. But after undering what it was saying, yes this is factually correct! The 2nd explanation did try to separate the phenomena from the observer!! This is proven and seen in the text on paragraph 3!!! Explicitly stated!!! The reason I missed is due to not understand the AC!
Solution: Focus on selecting AC that is provable not too strong! Also if unsure what an AC is saying, trying slowly breaking down the convoluted language into something simple! Also refer back to text after understand AC!
26. Concept Reference, MBT, Author Perspective
I was 50/50 b/w A & B. The correct AC is B. I selected A. A is FACTUALLY WRONG. The specific concept is field of sight as the concept reference NOT frontback explanation of observer & phenomena! This desire to simplify what mirrors do does not apply to field of sight!
B is correct! Did not like as i WAS 100% SURE AND FELT AC HAD TO BE inferred. But the rest of the AC options sucked and not supported. That’s what made me org eleimiante this AC. B is correct cause 2D flaw never mentioned in 1st explanation!
RM: Selected an AC that was factually incorrect!
Solution: Reread AC option, go to selected paragraph and disprove wrong AC! POE would have been easy and would have selected correct AC!
27. Specific Reference, MBT Purpose
I chose AC A due to panic as clock was ticking! But! Wrong due to author never discussing such a contrast! Fails fact test! C is correct! At the end of 3rd paragraph, this is mentioned!
RM: I did not go look back at specific reference due to timing issues! I def could have gotten this! DONT throw away strategy for time!
PS4 Takeaways
Go back to text & select AC that oasses FACT test and has proof
Go back to referenced text & don’t just rely on memory
Use low res to refer back to text
Understand the passage well
Complete full low res
Ask “why is this written”
Agree with the above post!
@ Thank you so much this was really helpful!!!
Stimulus:
It is sometimes beleived that only the only relevant factors for determing moral guilt or innocence are the intention of the person doing the actions
BUT
circumstances outside OUR control often play a role in how our own moral judgement of action is percieved.
Ex:
If cook adds ingredient to stew would be regarded at forgetful, not immorlal
BUT
If the stew were to accidently kill someone allergic to ingredient, the cook would be guilty of serious moral negligence
D. Correct! Why? Cause in this case the chief was help morally blameworth as a result of an outer curcumstances which might have been outside their control, which was the person being allergic to the ingredient.
Hello,
My name is Carlos . I am a rising Junior and plan on taking the LSAT sometime April or June of 2020. I know I still have a long way to go until I take the LSAT. But I was unsure on which LSAT Prep course to purchase from 7sage. I really want to aim on getting into the high 160s and low 170s range. My diagnostic LSAT test was a 147. But I know that with a prep course, I can move up to the 160s. I plan on starting my prep studying this Monday.
I am stuck between getting the LSAT Ultimate and Ultimate plus. Money is not to big on an issues since I see this as an investment to my future. But what would you guys recommend for me to get ?
Thanks
Hello everyone,
I am reapplying this cycle to law school. I was wondering if I will have to request my transcripts again(nothing has changed) and request new letters of recommendations from my previous professors? I applied last year but decided to wait off another year after looking at the law schools I was admitted to and got denied from.
Also, do I have to change drastically my personal statement? In my personal statement I wrote about why I wanted to become a lawyer and my reasons for why I want to become a lawyer have not changed. I also do not want to resubmit the same personal statement but also not write something entirely new.
Any tips would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance!
Thanks!
LOL I didn't choose C because for some reason during the test, I thought to myself, "Okay labels, cool. but what if Jason can't read and doesn't ask for help from the store employees and doesn't know the difference btw organic and those made with chemicals".
No looking back at it, I don't know what I was thinking, seeing as C was the best answer choice from all. haha I have some funny LSAT moments sometimes
Anyone else think this passage was brutal?