Admin edit: Please don't post full course questions! Instead, link to the question:

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/quiz-on-drawing-valid-conclusions-with-translations-4-answers

But what if I change the question into: Geniuses do not date lazy people. Vesper is smart. (skip this useless sentence) Derek is extremely attractive and lazy.

Isn't it incorrect to conclude that Vesper will not date Derek because unlike the original question, you can't automatically equate Vesper being smart as being a genius? In the original question, being genius must mean one is smart, but being smart doesn't guarantee you are genius smart.

I'm trying to flip things around and see how different conclusions can be made and so on. Feedback would be much appreciated! :)

Unfortunately, I have ALREADY registered for my Sept exam but I won't be able to get the score I want by Sept. Things didn't work out according to plan and I really don't know what to do.

My originally plan was to take about 20-30 PTs before my first actual exam, but as of now, I'm only able to drill by section to increase my speed. I miss about 5-6 questions in LR and have 6 minutes left before the last logic game. I'm not able to read all 4 RC passages and even the ones I do get to read, I get 1-3 wrongs per passage. RC is my worst nightmare and I don't know whether keep drilling it will increase my speed. But when I redo all of the above sections untimed during my BR, I get 85%-100% right. They are not really hard to solve and understand when I don't do them under timed conditions (except for the hardest RC passages) but I get stressed out, nervous, and rush through questions during timed conditions that I don't get to understand some sentences and overlook some key words. For instance, there is always at least one weirdly worded rule in logic games that makes me freeze and hurt my confidence to solve questions accurately. That disappointment and fear have psychological impact on my performance and makes me keep doubt whether I indeed translated the rest of the rules accurately. Overall, it frustrates me that there are many questions that are solvable but I just can't do them properly and accurately because I THINK I don't have enough time and I ACTUALLY don't have enough time. So I came to the conclusion that it's more practical of me to raise my LR and LG speed & score to compensate for my weak RC skills given the amount of time I got.

With these timing issues to overcome, I need to begin my PTing phase next week. I don't think doing about 15 PTs will be enough of practice before the actual test. Ideally, I want to take about 35-40 PTs, but realistically, it's unfeasible by Sept. I'm pretty sure I won't reach in the low 160s by Sept (especially due to this huge timing issue with RC) but I need at least high160s to apply to my dream schools. So I'm thinking of taking the Sept test to just get the experience of taking the exam with many people under stressful conditions and cancelling the score right after the test to not leave any record of unwanted score. I will keep on studying after the first exam, and hopefully by Dec, I will get enough practice with all of my 3 sections (especially RC) to reach my target score and take the Dec exam with no plan of cancelling the score. And by Jan/early Feb, I will be ready to send my applications to my dream schools. Even if I really screw up my Dec exam, I will be able to take one last exam in Feb. I also don't intend to apply for 2018 admission and take any more exams after Feb. I must apply for the fall 2017 admission.

So I'm not sure whether postponing the test date (by paying $90) is a good idea because that would mean losing money and the chance to experience what it's really like taking the exam at the test center. Similarly, if I get a refund, I only get $50 back and I lose the chance to practice under actual test conditions. In my country, I'm not able to even enter the classrooms where the test will be taken because I'm not one of the school's students, doors are closed, classes are being held, and etc. I won't have the opportunity to practice at the test center like some people can abroad. I actually went to the test center in June to check out and get some info on the test center and one of the people who are in charge of administering the exam explicitly told me that I can't enter any of the rooms to practice. She asked me why I'm being so sensitive about the exam. Um...ok. I may be a sensitive person but I mean isn't this supposed to be a serious exam? Haha.

Anyway, the only concern I have about cancelling the score is what if it in anyway hurts my application? If you were in my shoes, what would you do?

Hi. I'm not sure how to translate "those in search of jobs should move to a city with high-tech businesses" into lawgic. I thought the word "should" might be a necessary condition, but JY didn't put an arrow to connect JOBS and HIGH TECH. Whereas in Manhattan forum, one of the instructors translated it as "if you want JOBS, go to HT" which would require the use of an arrow. So I'm not sure which is the right approach to take..

Also, is it even a valid argument?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-25/

Hello. I was wondering if I fail to cancel LSAT registration by tonight 11:59pm, the schools will get to KNOW that I withdrew from Jan exam. I want to make a decision tomorrow morning depending on my physical/mental condition....so I don't want to cancel it tonight in case I do want to take the test for the last time.

As I was reviewing my old notes, I've noticed that I wrote the definition of "few are" as some are/SOME ARE NOT but "few not" as most are/some are not.

Shouldn't "few are" mean some are / MOST ARE NOT?

I can't believe I'm still confused about this concept..wow. English.

Do all method of reasoning questions contain flawed arguments? Or are there some valid arguments out there? I'm getting confused whether I'm suppose to look for the flaw or just how the argument functions as a whole or even BOTH. I'm not sure what kind of mindset to have for attacking method of reasoning questions.

When do I know I should rely on intuition before attempting to diagram everything?

When do I know this formulaic A->B method 100% works?

I don't know how to be selective about which approach to take with complete confidence without wasting precious minutes!

PrepTest 22 - Section 4 - Question 13 illustrates my point.

If I just straight up went with my intuition, I would've chosen D with a good feeling because it looks pretty much like what the whole passage is saying while the rest of the answer choices look pretty off, but because I attempted to solve this question like a math problem, I couldn't FIND THE EXACT ANSWER I was looking for.

I wonder how other students feel about this. Advice much needed and appreciated.

Is "as long as" a sufficient condition indicator or does it depend on context?

ex) As long as you study for the LSAT, you will get into any law school.

= LSAT --> Any LS

Someone please clarify this for me.

Great thanks in advance! :)

Can someone explain the reasoning behind answer choice (B)? I'm not 100% sure why oxygen-18 in seawater is increased, not decreased.

Thanks in advance! :)

I'm not sure why 1) negating morally right to mean morally wrong is incorrect and 2) negating right to mean wrong is incorrect. Please explain!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-june-2007-section-2-question-23

I'm confused why the arrow splits for PT 22 GAME 4 RULE 4 and the arrow doesn't split for PT 31 GAME 2 RULE 4 even though they both contain the words NEITHER NOR.

I thought the arrow can't be split for NEITHER NOR statements.

I need confirmation whether my understanding of OR rule is correct.

There is a rule in the last game of PT24 that says: G cannot be prescribed if both N and U are prescribed.

N & U -->/G

Contrapositive= G --> /N or /U

So there are 3 possibilities if the contrapositive is triggered: 1) N is out 2) U is out or 3) N and U are both out.

If I CHANGE the rule to G --> N or U, would 3 possibilities be 1) N is in 2) U is in or 3) N and U are both in?

Is it correct to consider OR in the above examples as inclusive(and/or), not exclusive?

Even though the question stem doesn't explicitly say "which one of the following could be a *COMPLETE AND ACCURATE* list of people selected" like what most of other questions do, do I still need to automatically assume that the list needs to be complete? Are they the same thing?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-9-section-3-game-3

I really don't like the way answer choice (E) is worded. It's too ambiguous and abstract that I was not able to wrap my head around it during timed conditions and made me go for easier sounding wrong answer choice even though I knew it was descriptively incorrect!

Can someone explain to me what (E) is even saying?

And do recent tests have answers like this?

Thanks in advance!

I know answer choice B is not supported but I can't explain to myself WHY it's wrong.

Is it wrong because the terms "apple" and "citrus" should be switched places? Could it be a right answer choice if the answer choice actually read:

[McElligott's citrus juices are less likely to contain infectious bacteria than is McElligott's apple juice]

Because McElligott's citrus juices HAVE NOT BEEN LINKED TO ANY BACTERIAL INFECTIONS, can't I assume that they contain less infectious bacteria than M'S apple juice?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-52-section-1-question-24/

One of the RC videos that I watched mentioned that when something (call it X) happens more & more frequently, it does not mean that X happens most of the time. But I read it from one of the PowerScore posts that "more often than not" means MOST. They sound quite similar to me, so I'm not sure how to make a distinction between them. If I change it to "X happens more & more frequently THAN NOT" would it equate to most?

I was wondering whether LSAC will be cruel enough to give 3 LR sections in a row ( 2 + experimental). I really hope that is NOT the case!

From Columbia's website:

Can I submit an addendum or additional written materials along with my application?

Yes. The Admissions Committee believes that candidates should be able to expand upon aspects of their candidacy that are otherwise not represented in the required materials. Some examples include diversity statements, statements of strong interest in Columbia Law School, explanations of undergraduate and/or LSAT performance, etc. We strongly suggest that applicants use their best judgment, in terms of content and length, when considering the submission of supplemental materials.

So the question is do I treat it like a Why X essay? I'm not sure if writing one is a good idea...

This is a sufficient assumption question but one of the forums I read to understand answer choice (A) explained that NEGATING (A) would demonstrate it to be a sufficient assumption. I totally see that negating (A) would weaken the argument, but I thought we use negation test for necessary assumption questions ...or am I not aware of some exceptions? I know that for some flaw questions that contain "takes for granted/assumes that" language, you can negate the answer choices, but I never heard of using negation test for sufficient assumption questions.

I watched the video explanation for this, but I don't think I understood it 100%.

I think the author's logic is simplified as farther=brighter=younger but I don't quite understand how a brighter star is supposed to be younger. Is this true in real life? Ha..

Maybe I'm overthinking this problem..?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-2-question-20/

I think the error that author makes is false equation (population # = # of library users) but can someone explain answers (B) and (E) in further detail? Thanks in advance! :)