@ " said:

When you say "change things so significantly," I don't think you're thinking about it in the right way. "If" always introduces the sufficient condition. The statement "my car needs gas in order to run" -- by virtue of the logical indicator "needs" -- proposes that gas is a necessary condition for the car's ability to run. The statement that "if I put some gas in the tank, my car will run" is an entirely different statement that cannot be inferred from the previous statement. It could be independently true, but that is irrelevant for the purpose of this question; it proposes a different relationship between gas and the car's ability to run. But again, the point is that gas being sufficient cannot be inferred from the statement that gas is necessary.

I see. That makes sense -- sort of. It's a bit tricky though, isn't it? The logical indicator in one statement, the first statement, tells us one thing, and then the following conditional IF-statement tells us another thing. Hmm!

Also following.

I mix it up. Typically, I take the prep test and then immediately follow up with the BR. This, for me, is usually the most beneficial. But sometimes, I take the prep test and don't BR until the next day. And rarely, if it is a very old prep test, I don't BR at all. (I know that's not the "right way" of doing it, but when I haven't studied in a while, I like to knock the rust off with a timed prep test and that's my only real objective of taking it.)

Man! These answer choices spin my brain.

@ " said:

Review what lesson this type of problem this is from. It is giving an example of flawed reasoning. You left out the part where my car needs gas to run. (assuming we found this prompt in the same place.)

Thanks for the response!

It seems you found the example. Yes, it is giving an example of flawed reasoning. And yes, I did leave out the part at the very beginning. The passage, in its entirety, reads: "My car needs gas in order to run. Therefore, if I put some gas in the tank, my car will run."

So does the first part, "My car needs gas in order to run" change things so significantly that the IF statement can no longer be counted upon to introduce a sufficient condition?

A 1:1 comparison would be if the other example read: "You need to study in order to pass the LSAT. Therefore, if you study, you will beat the LSAT." Here, with the first statement preceding the second, we would then write the rule as B -> S instead of S -> B ? That doesn't seem right to me.

@ said:

Let me see if I can help. I know that there are situations in which "if" is tagged along with the necessary condition BUT this is only because there are other component factors like "if" being present with "only if". In this case the "if" because it is with the "only" would have to be diagram as the necessary condition. Not sure if that answers your question?

Not sure how into the CC you are in but there are scenarios in which you can logical indicators that are present with other logical indicators. Ex.) you can have "unless" with "no" In this case you can choose either or and still diagram the statement appropriately.

Hey buddy! Thanks for the reply. :)

I understand that IF =/= ONLY IF, but that wasn't the case with the aforementioned car and gas scenario. I'd link to the website, but I'm sure that linking to a competitor's site would be frowned upon here, and understandably so.

I actually got the question wrong because I marked "gas in the car" as the sufficient condition. I marked it as the sufficient condition because it was introduced by IF, and also because, while we know in the "real world" that many different factors can contribute to a car's running, the statement tells us definitively "IF I put gas in my car, my car will run."

I just want to make sure that I'm not missing something. I want to make sure that IF (not ONLY IF or any other alternative phrasing) signals a sufficient condition, never a necessary condition.

@ said:

I graduated in 2017. My LORs will all be from my professional career, since I haven’t kept up with any past professors of mine. I personally don’t see this as an issue. Hope this helps.

Thanks for the feedback!

@ said:

7Sage Admissions Consultant chiming in here!

While it's always great to have an academic letter, Admissions Officers realize that that's not really feasible once you get a few years out of your most recent collegiate work. Put another way, if I opened up an application and saw that some graduated from college in 2015, I would automatically assume that I would be reading professional LoRs instead of academic ones.

So what should you do about your letters? I'd encourage you to reach out to your supervisors. They can give a sense of what you bring to the work space on a daily basis.

And regarding your second question about reaching out to a school post-decision for feedback, I'd say that there's no reason to worry about that now. Keep your eyes on your goals (most immediately - doing well on the LSAT) and approaching your applications with confidence!

Thanks so much for the reply! I think you're right. Doing well on the LSAT should be my one, singular goal for right now. I'm taking it in April, so, fingers crossed!

You can upgrade at any time. I'm choosing to go through all of the core course material and seek out additional resources (books and such) before opting for the live classes -- not because I'm cheap, but because I think this will be a more effective use of my time. (Once I know what my weaknesses truly are, I can choose to attend only those live classes that will address those weaknesses.) For example, I already know that time management will be a problem for me, and I believe 7sage has live classes addressing this concern and suggesting solutions. I'll more than likely check out that live class or the recording of that live class (if there is one).

That's awesome! Congrats!

My advice would be to make your studying count. It sounds like you have a lot on your plate already with school and with work. Studying for six hours a day isn't going to be possible, and, frankly, I don't believe that studying for six hours a day is all that beneficial for most people.

Find an hour to study each day or on most days, and make that studying count. In your mind, set an objective: "For this hour, I will drill logical reasoning questions" or "For this hour, I will practice in/out games." And don't feel bad about not studying. Be flexible. If you had a long, particularly stressful day, you may not be in the right mindset to study in any meaninful, worthwhile way. If it's not going to be meaningful, why bother? Rest. Don't let this become a habit, or an easy out for you. Be sincere and honest with yourself. "I can't focus right now and I'm not likely to get much out of studying."

On the weekends, take a practice test or two. And take the blind review seriously. I am 100% convinced that blind review is beneficial and worthwhile. It is, without question, where I personally made the most progress. (If you can answer the question correctly when you are given all of the time in the world to really look at and examine the question, then you understand the question; time becomes the only factor, and a person can get better at answering questions more quickly with repeated practice.) It's time-consuming and you will want to see your score without having to go through the blind review, but resist the temptation. Take the blind review seriously.

You can absolutely break 140. You got this.

Thanks so much for the reply! Excellent tips!

First of all, I respect the dedication. But am I the only one who thinks that studying for 4 to 5 hours each day is excessive? It sounds to me as though you may be putting in the time, but it's not necessarily time well spent. (I could be wrong!)

I do this with chess. I love chess, and I want to get better, but instead of really taking the time to analyze my games and learn opening theory, etc. -- I just play a million games. Needless to say, my chess rating hasn't improved much. (Experience and "time spent" do not always equal results, unfortunately.)

These concepts sometimes take a lot of time to sink in. For me, at least, they do. To give you some idea, just the simple concept that "only if" and "only when" introduce necessary conditions took me, like, a week to wrap my head around. "Food is in the fridge only when Rufus is not around." I had the most difficult time realizing that Rufus can not be around, and food can still NOT be in the fridge. I actually made small posters with examples of "only if" and "only when" statements and hung them around my work space so I could look at it often.

I would try to figure out what key concepts you're struggling with, concepts that haven't become entirely clear or intuitive yet, and go from there. Just my two cents. Best of luck to you! You got this!

@ said:

@ I'm a slow reader too, so I can really relate to that. How much time do you spend on average reading a passage? Usually, the time I spend reading a passage is fairly stagnant, but there are strategies you can use to eliminate any non-essential work to get your reading time down a little bit. Not everything you read in the passage is important, but if you read as if it is, then your passage time will suffer. Learn skills on how to identify what you need to pay attention to (i.e. author's attitude) and what you don't (i.e. usually small supporting details) to eliminate that non-essential work and get your passage time down.

For me, I usually take about 4 minutes reading the passage. That leaves about 40 seconds on average per question, so I have to be aggressive through the questions. But the way I read the passage allows me to be confident and choose the correct answer choice without having to go back to the passage very often. If you're spending too much time on the questions, you might want to consider reflecting on if that time was essential or not. Very often when I was studying, out of anxiety I would go back and confirm what I read in the passage when I essentially knew I had the right answer, because I "just wanted to be sure." Obviously this time was wasted time in the end and I had to practice eliminating that wasted effort from my process.

I hope this helps you on your journey! Let me know if I can clarify anything.

Whoa! Thanks for all of this! I'm definitely spending more than 4 minutes per passage. I'll have to go back and check, but I'm certain it's more than 4 minutes. And I definitely go back to the passage "just to be sure" before continuing on to the other questions. It's wasted time for sure. I'm going to try not doing that from now on, in addition to paying attention to the essential information.

This is all good, good stuff! Can't thank you enough for the response!

@ said:

@, I co-hosted a free webinar on time management strategies not too long ago, I'll link the recording below. I hope this helps you on your journey!

Thanks so much! Time management, for me, is a real concern. The one area that I felt most confident in, reading comprehension, has become my weakest area. (I'm an English teacher; I figured that reading comprehension would be my strength!) The problem is that, while I'm a good reader, I'm also a slow reader. I get the answers correct, but it's at the expense of not answering 4 or 5 questions at the very end and having to guess with 60 seconds on the clock. If I can figure out a solution to that problem, I think I'll be in much better shape.

Congratulations! I wouldn't be too disappointed by a 150, especially now considering that many recent test-takers have seemed to experience about a -10 point decrease on their actual test score when compared to their average score on practice tests.

That's awesome! Congratulations!

Yeah I think I understand now. The point of the prompt was to give an example of a logical reasoning flaw. The first sentence tells us that the car needs gas to run, and the second sentence comes to a conclusion that is, well, flawed. Not sure why this took me so long to understand. I get it now.

oof! Is this typical? I am wondering now how much can be attributed to nerves/anxiety and how much can be attributed to "tougher questions." Hmm!

Good stuff! Congratulations!

Yep. Especially with taking practice tests. "I can't fail if I don't try!" It makes no sense, but that's how my brain works.

So, I think the important thing to keep in mind is that while your intuition may have served you well, you should understand why you got a particular question right. What was it, specifically, that you intuitively picked up on, and why were you able to identify the correct answer? It is as important to understand why you got a question right as it is to understand why you got a question wrong, in my opinion. In this way, you'll be able to move from a mere gut feeling ("intuition") to a true understanding, and that will bring consistency.