i did it already but now i heard about the new core curriculum for the august test and beyond. i want to take the test after august so i will be taking the test without logic games

I am trying to put In my scores but it won't let me put in both my logical reasoning sections. Do I only need to put in one of my logical reasoning sections?

I have thought a lot , over the past year, about the finitude of official lsat questions published by lsac, and the finitude of practice tests. i think theres only 92 or 93 prep tests. What happens if i run out of all of these before I arrive at my goal scores? I have tried to "pretend to forget" how to play certain games , but it doesnt work. i immediately remember how to play the game, the major inferences etc. same thing with logical reasoning questions. even if i havent seen the question in 8 months, i immediately remember the right answer. this is a bad feeling because i didnt earn the right answer. and its a terrible way to get a ballpark diagnostic in my opinion. and its also bad preparation for my REAL test, where i will be faced with all new games and questions.

how do you approach the reality of finite lsat prep test resources? manhattan prep creates bunches of logic games from scratch which is cool, but does anything like that exist for logical reasoning? do any companies create logical reasoning questions that i can try to solve with fresh eyes?

I've been going through the PT'S sequentially since pt 36. Got my best score on the last one I took which was pt64 and then yesterday i took pt 65. What was that!? Two 5star rc passages, extremely unusual lr questions, it was a nightmare. Did anyone else take this pt and halfway through felt like they've never taken a pt before?

presumably the point is to reinforce the concepts learned previously. for example i just finished the whole section about the weakening questions, and that section ends with 7 or 8 "questions problem sets" ...........but here is what i dont understand : we were told at the start of the curriculum that the newer preptests would all be SAVED to be used later as FRESH practice tests. but these questions problem sets throughout the curriculum contain questions from some of the newer preptests!

so are we supposed to save new preptests to be used FRESH in their entirety for practice tests? or are we supposed to dutifully complete all of the "question problem sets" throughout the curriculum, regardless of how many of the questions WITHIN these problem sets are from newer preptests (the SAME prep tests we were told originally we would be saving to take fresh)?

i am confused. and i had a 7sage staff member/ autotmatic response person offer an explanation which i didnt find satisfactory

(spoiler alert if you havent taken PT41) :

its the question that begins with "poor nutrition is at the root....."

the logic in the argument seems to me to look like "high nutrient diet ---> improved behavior ".........but the credited response was answer choice E which states " ~high nutrient diet-----> ~improved behavior"

intuitively, this answer choice feels correct, but wouldnt this be whats called "denial of the antecedent"?? other books call it illegal negation or denying the sufficient condition, but the point i guess is that its logically invalid. and yet that invalid logical structure is present in the correct answer choice for this question. Can someone explain that to me? thank you

Explanation Video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-14/

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

she was cute as a button. her and henry were debating normative statements on the last 7sage podcast she was on and she gave some very clever response to one of his points. it was toward the end of the episode, something about "just because i can doesnt mean i should" or something like that

my gpa is 3.54 but on lsac it says my gpa is between 3.5 and 3.74 which is "mostly A's"..........does this mean that , according to law schools, a gpa of 3.5 is identical to a gpa of 3.73? because they are in the same range? how does that work?

ive been in the workforce for a while, im 28 and applying to law school in october. i have solid academic rec letters from professors but do i also need one from my job's manager? or is that superfluous?

I don't know how else to describe it. I'm extremely worried that i'm going to finish all of these powerscore bibles and all of these early preptests like PT40-50 and then suddenly the sections are going to get way harder when I get into PT70-90. I already know that the RC gets harder on the more recent PT's which freaks me out. It makes me think all of this work I've done in the core curriculum etc is going to keep a good score out of my reach

when JY says to print "ten clean copies" of games in order to memorize the inferences of games, which games is he talking about? just the games featured in the videos in the LG core curriculum? or is he talking about those AS WELL as the games in the problem sets? and if hes also talking about the games in the problem sets, how many of those is he talking about?

i like the idea of doing a game repeatedly and unremittingly until ive memorized it. i just dont know on which games im supoosed to be practicing this strategy. thank you

i was all the way through the old core curriculum when the new version of 7sage came out with all the new prep tests. i have been testing from pt 36 all the way up to pt 61 using the old format but now i want to take pt62-pt94 using the new preptests. however, it doesnt look like the new preptests work that way. would it be okay for me to just continue taking 3 sections of pt 62-94, while adding on an old section for each preptests myself? i like doing the prep tests sequentially, like 62, 63, 64 , 65 etc. i also like how jy ping adds commentary every 4 or 5 prep tests using students live takes and i dont want to lose that.

for someone who has been prep testing sequentially all the way since pt 36, how can i continue to do this while also adding in a 4th section in the most realistic way possible? thank you

My last 4 pt's have been on average a score of 159. The law school I want to go to has a median lsat of 159. Should I keep PT'ing over the spring and summer and take the test in September and apply in October of this year? At what point would I want to get my recommendation letters and other loose ends of my application tied up? What scores should I be seeing before I stop PT's and sign up for the real thing? Thanks

stimulus :

"There can be a known known only if theres a known unknown, but there can never be an unknown unknown without a known unknown. Thus, every unknown unknown which is known is actually a known unknown which is unknown."

question : the conclusion above follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

the content of this question is inspired by the "Rumsfeld Matrix." What would be a sufficient assumption for this question? Is this a hard question or did you find it on the easier end of SA questions?

i loved watching kevin on youtube, im glad he joined 7sage to do explanation videos

I purchased my first lsat prep book in October of 2020. It was the princeton review book. Things haven't been easy, and I've used many different prep programs, but in 2023 I started to see major progress through 7sage. I've never given up. I work on the lsat every day.

Ill be 28 next month. My conception of an lsat student is someone who's like 22 or 23. What is the relationship between the lsat and someone's age? I love learning more and more about the test each day. I want to get a score in the 160s and get into my local law school. But I cant help but see, in my peripheral vision, the months fly by

Perhaps the magazine has worked for you, but I find the economist to be very soft reading material and unsatisfactory for RC improvement. For a food analogy, It's like chewing Gerber baby food, when RC passages are like tough sinewy steak.

However, I will say that what seems to work for me is reading philosophy books, in particular books by Daniel dennett. I'm currently reading his book Intuition Pumps, and after reading a few chapters of it, when I do rc passes, I feel myself breezing through them. (I know he's most famous as a new atheist, but his philosophical insights are his most impressive contributions to thought in my opinion).

If you're struggling with RC give him a try. Freedom Evolves, Brainstorms, etc. He has many books from decades of writing. Also, consider that every lsat question you've ever read was written by someone who was either a philosophy PhD or in pursuit of a philosophy phd. The two subjects , LSAT and philosophy, seem to be almost the same thing. Best luck to all, keep studying!

If I identify the experimental section properly could I use it as a 35 minute break? Knowing that it's not going to be scored? Is this a good or bad idea for my test day? Let me know. Thank you

im in such a groove of pt and blind review that i want to blind review my real test in case i need to take it again

i read recently an article by the ABA that indicated that lawyers on average score very high on surveys in positive traits like analytical reasoning and abstract reasoning, but very poorly on sociability and , notably, "resilience" which apparently is a trait meaning how well someone "rolls with the punches"...."lets things go" etc. just general agreeableness i guess you could say

have you noticed any negative personality changes in yourself as a result of lsat study? i love studying for the lsat. on balance, im happy with the way the geometry of my thinking has been reshaped by the test. but ive also definitely become a more cynical person. ive become more circumspect of the motives of others, and ive become much more critical toward things people say. the change in this person climate of mine has produced new weather patterns of occasional annoyance, irritation, and downpours of negativity. i find it interesting honestly. ive read all the positive ways the test has changed people , but talk to me about some of the negative ways? thank you

https://www.legal500.com/gc-magazine/feature/all-in-the-mind/

above is the article. its an interesting read. i originally read it on the ABA site a while back.

stimulus :

"There can be a known known only if theres a known unknown, but there can never be an unknown unknown without a known unknown. Thus, every unknown unknown which is known is actually a known unknown which is unknown."

the conclusion above follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

the content of this question is inspired by the "Rumsfeld Matrix." What would be a sufficient assumption for this question? Is this a hard question or did you find it on the easier end of SA questions?

Hi, I am reading Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman and he's talked about "conjunction fallacies" and "base rate fallacies" which are reminding me of some lsat questions I've seen before in logical reasoning. Does 7sage cover these fallacies at all in any explanation videos? They're definitely trickier than standard source attack or equivocation fallacies, and they are hard to understand sometimes. It seems like you need to know Bayes theorem to fully understand some of these concepts and I don't have any background in statistical math or probability theory

have you ever heard an lsat prepbook describe a negative sufficient condition as a "denial of the antecedent" or an illegal negation described as "affirmation of the consequent"? Ever heard a book mention the latin modus tollens? ponens?

i have not. ever.

the lsat prep books seem to give these concepts different names and designations. However, as i got more interested in conditional logic and formal logic concepts (as a result of lsat studying), i stumbled upon an old book called "A System of Logic" by John Stuart Mill (1843). Mill's book seems to take a look at LSAT logic concepts (provided by the lsat prepbooks ) in a much more formal way, giving the concepts more complicated names, introducing different symbols for propositional statements etc.

my question is this : do the lsat prep books SIMPLIFY mill's book? or is mill's book a more THOROUGH version of the lsat prepbooks? furthermore, could mill's book be used as a complete substitute to some of the lsat prepbooks, helping students save money on prepbooks and ultimately providing a better logical foundation than the prepbooks could provide anyway?

let me know what you think, thanks.