CONGRATS, CHAIM!!! I am so happy for you :) You deserve every bit of it!!

Retaking in September haha

Here is the link to "Ask Me Anything with AccountsPlayable": https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/comment/99062

Thank you for the webinar yesterday. One vote for Application Requirements for Top Law Schools (2017).

Have you considered other top 25 schools in the Midwest? Even with your GPA, with a 170+ LSAT score, you have a good shot at WUSTL and Minnesota with scholarship (http://mylsn.info/and472/).

Have you considered taking in both July and September?

And I also highly recommend the BR calls - I saw so much improvement in LR after joining BR calls for my June LSAT.

@amatthews304968 Yes, the same! I felt pretty time-crunched on that first LR.

EDIT:

@quirksarah1574 I had the same sequence: LR RC LR LR LG. I just searched on Reddit, and it looks like my first LR, which had 26 questions, was the experimental.

Hey I like your name/profile pic. I love Demi Soda :)

Now that you already have fool-proofed all those games, I would say revisit the basics. Review your habits and reinforce good ones/eliminate bad ones. Check the following:

When writing down the rules, are you numbering them like JY does in his videos (Rule #1 X-Y, Rule #2 Z-X, etc.)? This is a simple habit, but it is essential. Always write down each rule separately before combining the rules together (especially the ones with logical chain).

Review your method of diagramming. What is your method/habit for each game type?

I find vertical diagramming/game board works best for grouping/in-out and horizontal for sequencing. This approach is particularly efficient when a game includes both grouping/sequencing because you can fit all the rules in one game board without confusion. If this approach does not work for you, that is fine - just review how you diagram for each game type and reinforce that method.

Also review how you diagram each rule. Are they simple enough? Are they distinguishable from each other (How do you diagram "A comes some time before B" and "B immediately follows A" differently?)

In reviewing your habits, it may also be worthwhile to try to explain how you solved a few games to another person. Explaining forces you to remember how you did the game, so it helps you become more conscious about your methods.

So well-deserved :)

Guys, I am catching a cold so I am going to bed early :( See you guys next week!

@acsimon699 I think what you are referring to is "none" as the logical opposite (negation) of "some". "Some are not" is the negation of "all", not of "some".

I think @jhleejenny15 is correct in that "some are not" translates to 0-99, as "not all" translates to 0-99.

Missed you guys @twssmith644 and @chahyong966! See you next week :)

Join the RC call with JY! There is another one tonight.

https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/15999/rc-review-pts-58-65-all-rc-sections-may-3rd-june-2nd-9pm-midnight-edt

@njytan245 And you really nailed that summary today! This session is helping me so much too.

@leahbeuk911

I was in a similar position as you when I came back to studying after the December LSAT and 2018 admissions.

Rather than doing full PTs or timed LG sections, how about doing separate drills on sequencing, in/out, grouping, mixed? You probably don't need to learn it all over again, so it would be good to just separate out and clarify LG by each type.

@mmaritzagarcia303

This is the link: https:// i.imgur.com/YMFSCrd.png (Delete the space between https:// and i)

The next session is tomorrow (Saturday) at 9 p.m. EST for PT 58 Passages 3 and 4.

@atviolin497 Thanks for providing the question!

As a reminder to myself, here are the necessary condition indicators: then, must, only, only if, only when, depends, requires.

@atviolin497

"Ensure"/"Assure" is tricky in that it has a nuance of time delay. The definition of "ensure" is "make certain that (something) shall occur". Similarly, the definition of "assure" is "make (something) certain to happen".

Because of that subtle nuance, or the ambiguity of, time, I don't think ensure/assure qualifies as a necessary condition indicator. For instance, given "perfect market economy", I am not sure whether "maximum utility" would be ensured immediately or eventually.

So, if I were to translate "Perfect market economy ensures maximum utility" into a conditional statement, maybe I should be indicating the time as well:

If "perfect market economy", then "maximum utility" at some point.

(Contrapositive: If "no maximum utility" now or ever, then "not perfect market economy".)

So, to go back to the example I wrote in my first response, the statement "Only success assures happiness" will not translate into the bi-conditional statements. It will only translate into:

If "assures happiness", then "success"

If "no success", then "happiness not assured"

If "success", then "happiness at some point"

If "no happiness now or ever", then "no success"

What do you think?

@atviolin497 hahaha the song reference, and thank you for your insight!

@mkang89885

Wow - "Only perfect market economy ensures maximum utility, though others may achieve maximum utility as well" is a really interesting statement. It is NOT a bi-conditional in my opinion, and here is why:

"Ensure" is being used as part of the sufficient condition itself. The sufficient condition is "Ensure maximum utility", rather than just "maximum utility". Thus, the first conditional statement goes as:

If "maximum utility is ensured", then "perfect market economy".

(Contrapositive: If not "perfect market economy", then "maximum utility is not ensured".)

This statement still holds true even with the latter phrase "though others may achieve maximum utility as well". According to the contrapositive, even if it is not "perfect market economy", "maximum utility" itself is not necessarily precluded from ever happening - it is just not ensured.

I am thinking about whether "ensure" is also being used a necessary condition indicator. I will write more when I can clarify my thoughts.

@chahyong966

Here is a post from Pacifico. He mentions reading materials as well as audio books:

https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/3035

@mkang89885

I think "Only A is B" is different from "Only A assures B".

"Only A is B" (B -> A) does not necessarily preclude other necessary conditions. For instance, "Only the best regional swimmers will participate in the state competition" does not preclude "To participate in the state competition, one must be 16 years or older":

Participate in the state competition -> best regional swimmers

Participate in the state competition -> 16 years or older.

So, to elaborate on your example ("Only you are the winner of this competition"), this still does not preclude "To win this competition, one must participate in this competition", for instance. There can be other necessary conditions that may not contradict the original statement.

"Only A assures B", however, might be a bi-conditional as you suggested, although I am not 100% certain. "Only" introduces a necessary condition, and so would "assure", which I think is being used in the same context as "guarantee".

Example: "Only success assures happiness" - if it were a bi-conditional, it should translate to the following statements:

One is happy if, and only if, one is successful

One is successful if, and only if, one is happy

If one is not happy, then one is not successful

If one is not successful, then one is not happy

This is interesting. Where have you seen "Only A assures B" on the LSAT? I would love to take a look at the specific example.

@ohnoeshalpme804 Oh wow! I used to be ENFP but now I am INFP. We can be emotional together lol

@mstng9878717 Here is an interesting post about reapplying with same numbers: https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/15604/re-applying-a-case-study

Have you considered applying ED for Northwestern next cycle? Northwestern gives $150K merit scholarship to ED applicants. If you are planning to stay in the Midwest and are debt-adverse, I think Northwestern might be a good option for you. I've lived in both cities for years, and the living expense in Chicago is much cheaper than DC.