You have to be able to understand what is sufficient to complete the argument. For example:

Being rich is sufficient to live well, but not necessary, whereas health is necessary to live well but not sufficient.

If you go and purchase a house that cost $100,000

$5000 is necessary but not sufficient.

$500,000 is sufficient but not necessary

$100,000 is both sufficient and necessary

Being a cat is sufficient for being an animal, but not necessary, and being alive is necessary but sufficient.

Money is necessary to purchase a house but not always sufficient. A mortgage can be sufficient but not necessary if you have cash. etc. etc.

Medication is sufficient to treat sickness, but is not always necessary. Your immune system is necessary but survival but not always sufficient for fighting off disease.

This pattern is what you must look for when doing SA and PSA questions. PSA are a little looser, but generally follow the same thought process.

@ said:

@ said:

@ said:

@ said:

@ said:

As others have said, it is unlikely. Don't take unless you are completely ready. Drill LR, focus on your weaknesses, and develop good habits. If you are not ready for July, take your mind off it and regroup later.

I disagree. I think you should take just so that you get used to sitting down for the test. The last thing you would want is to be prepared but not be accustomed to testing conditions and variables. There is no limit on how many times you can retake anymore, and you could always cancel.

I strongly disagree. Admissions deans from HYS have said on several different occasions that you should only take when you’re ready. It creates a data point that demonstrates lack of commitment. These schools in particular have advocated that you should only take it once and max twice. I literally heard Dean Faye say this in person. Same goes for Yale admissions. Harvard is a little more ambiguous but I digress. Further why would someone want to go through the experience of taking it just to take it? Would you run a marathon tomorrow if you haven’t prepared as much as you can just to get a feel for it?

I'm with @ . Not everyone is trying to get into HYS. These schools may be the exception, but they are not the rule. Most schools only care about your top score, it boosts their admission standards. If anything, I think taking it multiple times demonstrates a strong commitment to achieving the score you know you are capable of.

You could study the theory of snowboarding for years, but you'll never actually snowboard until you strap in and just do it to get used to the conditions. Who knows, maybe you go in and get lucky. Either way, you'll be more prepared for the next time. Be as prepared as you can obviously, but I think too many people stall or become anxious about the actual test day. Even the most prepared can have a bad test day, or pull a mental muscle from burnout. This too, will result in a retake.

Just take it and see what happens! You already payed, you might as well :wink:

Maybe but you wouldn’t snowboard as well as you would have if you spent more time practicing and that the problem. No one “just gets lucky.” Plus on top of that the analogy still stands: you wouldn’t enter snowboarding race or trick competition if you hadn’t adequately prepared.

Also the reason why it’s worth mentioning HYS is not simply because one should shoot for those schools, but because those schools are the standard.

It's generally acknowledged that schools only care about the highest score you earn, which is the score they have to report. Law school is a numbers-driven game. Unless you retake so many times it boarders on mental-illness, I highly doubt anyone would think twice about seeing multiple scores. I don't care what the dean says, unless your prepared to demonstrate that HYS conforms to that belief, their opinion holds little weight. Even if this was the standard for elite schools there are still countless others where this simply isn't the case.

I also don't completely agree with your analogy. There are plenty of people who run in marathons and don't actually finish. In fact, actually running one is the best way to gauge your performance and prepare for future competitions. Unlike the LSAT, you can run in unofficial races that simulate the real deal. The same applies to snowboarding competitions. To my knowledge, there are no "unofficial lsat" days where you can actually simulate the same thing. Taking a practice test and attempting to emulate actual testing conditions isn't always sufficient, especially when you haven't even experienced them beforehand.

Assuming what you said about HYS is even true, whose to say that multiple attempts at the LSAT looks worse than failing to obtain your max score? If test-day conditions causes the OP to miss 5+ questions more than they otherwise would have, are you honestly going to sit here and advise them not to retake because it may look bad? Also, keep in mind that we're quickly approaching the end of the year. A lot of people don't want to wait until December to submit applications. If OP waits until September or November to take their first test, and something goes wrong they may be locked out of schools they would otherwise have been admitted to.

Open 7sage and play a video from a cleanly installed browser and see if you still have the same issue.

When it said that each person gave widely varying accounts, I accidentally took that to mean that each person said the type of weather affected them at different times (one after an hour, one after 5 minutes, one after 5 hours, etc). I didn't catch that it was the same person giving different accounts each time.

There's no harm in trying. Just be careful because many of those medications can cause seizures if you stop abruptly.

I'll join.

@ said:

Are you employing skipping strategies?

Right now I only skip PMR or PFMR. I guess I don't skip more because I'm not always sure how much time I should give per question in the first half vs the second half when they are more difficult.

@ said:

Yes, this more than likely signals an issue with timing rather than a fundamental misunderstanding of the material. Many people have had to close this gap between understanding a question during review and coming up short in that understanding during timed sections/exams. This is a fundamental and much discussed issue for success on the LSAT. I have two general pieces of advice: 1. What you carry over from your review is the key to getting questions correct in the future. Keep up the review and dig deep into why the answer choice is credited and why the others are wrong. Make sure you are labeling premise and conclusion, spelling out possible assumptions and following referential phrasing. The goal of focusing on all of these aspects of the problem is to gain insight and confidence for future problems: thus helping to master the timing aspect of the exam.

2. This forum is replete with examples of people in the very same position as you. Check out a few of those older threads, there are some true gems of advice on many of those threads.

David

Thank you, I'll definitely do some research into it!

@ said:

I do the same thing! My practice sections go really well (for me that's like -3 or -4 haha) and my PT sections go -6 or -8. I think that I'm just rushing too much out of fear that I will run out of time. Are you running out of time or rushing to finish on time?

Yes I oftentimes either finish right one time without looking over everything I wanted to or about a minute or two late if i'm just doing a section. I think that's what happens to me as well, or I get caught up on some earlier questions which waste too much time.

@ said:

When are you testing? Are you struggling with a particular section?

I PT once a week because I don't get off work until after 6pm. I'm not struggling on a section but there are things I can definitely improve. I was trying to give even attention to each.

@ said:

As others have said, it is unlikely. Don't take unless you are completely ready. Drill LR, focus on your weaknesses, and develop good habits. If you are not ready for July, take your mind off it and regroup later.

I disagree. I think you should take just so that you get used to sitting down for the test. The last thing you would want is to be prepared but not be accustomed to testing conditions and variables. There is no limit on how many times you can retake anymore, and you could always cancel.

@ said:

Most support logging --> think ↓ fire

A doesn't think ↓ fire --> A doesn't support logging

but why is this a flaw. What you described is the contrapositive. Please someone help me this is really freaking me out for the test saturday. I've never encountered a question that I legit don't understand except this one.

@ said:

Luckily I just finished this PT... was about to enter my answers.. and saw your comment!

Most disapprove of PM --> support for ^tax

T likes ^tax ---> T approves of PM.

the argument, I think, flips and negates 1. I got this one right, and did so by reading it the way I just described.

I hope this helps!

I'm afraid I still don't understand why the contrapositive is considered wrong

Do you mean it does something like:

!a --> b

b --> a

Nothing is happening that will impact the 2018/2019 cycle. This all has implications for cycles down the road, and schools will move slowly for the next few cycles whatever happens.

— Spivey Consulting (@)

May 12, 2018

bump

I'm still confused with this question. I mapped it like this:

D --- > IIT (if disapprove then bc of support increase income tax)

IIT (Theresa supports income tax)

-----

therefore theresa approves.

I don't understand your explanation because isn't what you wrote the contrapositive, which would make it correct?

D--> TaxR

!TaxR

------Therefore !D

For some reason I cant wrap my head around this one.

#help

I'm still confused with this question. I mapped it like this:

D --- > IIT (if disapprove then bc of support increase income tax)

IIT (Theresa supports income tax)

-----

therefore theresa approves.

I don't understand your explanation because isn't what you wrote the contra-positive, which would make it correct?

D--> TaxR

!TaxR

------Therefore !D

#help

@ said:

By and large, I treated mine with skepticism about whether they were actually silly or more likely were really indicative of a larger problem. It's usually the easy way out to call it a dumb mistake.

If you misread a rule, a prompt, or an answer choice you made a dumb mistake but probably not because you just are going to make dumb mistakes. It is probably because your system of reading the question is somehow flawed or rushed.

If you just missed a question and now the answer seems obvious, why didn't it seem obvious the first time. Maybe you need more practice identifying this question type and implementing your approach to it.

Additionally, do you catch these stupid mistakes in your blind review? If you don't then you are not learning everything you can from the test. After all, if you have extra time on the real test you are probably going to go back and check. Don't you want practice trying to catch dumb mistakes when you don't know they are there?

I'm thinking your correct and that I'm probably rushing too often. The problem with catching these mistakes is they usually don't occur on questions that I mark for blind review. With LR for example, sometimes I'll read a word such as "can" as "cannot", probably from glossing over the content rather than focusing, and it causes me to eliminate the correct answer choice. I used to do this on LG rules as well but I have since managed to stop it. The problem is there is a lot more reading on the LR section, and i feel like reminding myself to do this creates a distraction from the actual question at hand.

Another problem I have is while taking practice exams, sometimes I get what could only be referred to as "cloudiness" during some of the LR sections which causes me to miss a few questions. When I go back after the fact I can immediately find the correct ac, but for some reason fatigue sets in when im doing actual questions. Maybe I just need to practice more? I don't really know how to address that but your answer was helpful. Thanks.