Interested! I'm in PT time as well and 3-5pm would work well.
really need this. interested!
how cool, thank you!
These are SOOOO nice!!!! Very comprehensive. Thank you so much!!
thank you!
Interested! Is the group still open?
Hello! What are the special test taking features that 7sage offers if you purchase the course? I don't quite understand how that works, and I don't see any contact info to ask questions. You take the test digitally via LawHub, and 7sage tracks the analytics (time spent per question, and the answer choices?) Would like more info on the features.
For those of you who plan to slug through LSAT over the holidays and would like to foolproof games, please DM if you want to do 5 games per week for the next 7 weeks or at least attempt to get through games 1-35 at least once.
#help Does anyone know the difference between self-contradictory and contradictory?
Interested as well!
There was some discussion about this on Reddit, so you're definitely not alone! It may just be that the PTs you studied tested different question types/content than what was on the test. I would definitely hit up that tutor for their advice too. Don't fret, it's only been 6 months and others have studied for years to get their goal score!
Really helpful post with useful insight for others. Thanks for sharing!
I’m interested!
This question stem is missing the "follows logically" that other sufficient assumption questions have. If another question stem is like this and just has "assumed", is it going to be a SA question?
#help
I struggled with this question too (twice!), and I don’t like the negation test on the answer choices because it didn’t seem to help clear any confusion.
The difference for me is that choice B points to “ordinary humans”. Why do we care about ordinary humans? That would be a nice thing to do, but it’s not necessary to make the argument airtight.
We care about humans as a whole, which includes astronauts. The argument doesn’t make a distinction between types of humans. We just need to know about humans.
Argument parts:
Premise - We need medical knowledge to test limits of human capacity for living in space craft for a long time for our future mission to Mars.
Conclusion - Essential to build a space station for astronauts to live for a long time.
The missing link between the premise and conclusion is that is we’re sending humans to Mars. Humans include astronauts, whether they are ordinary or not.
The subassumption is that astronauts are humans, which I suppose lumps into the general knowledge of things LSAT would expect you to know.
Hope that helps.
To me, B is a little bit of a contradiction. They lost weight by dieting. To maintain their reduced weight, they actually do still have to diet by eating less food than they did pre-weight loss.
So, this can’t be the main conclusion of the argument. They can’t stop dieting completely, so “should not diet” is not supported.
The “should” is a strong indicator word, and it can be used to rule out answer choices in context. “Must” is more strong than “should,” so I agree that if “should” was used in answer choice C, it would still be correct.
You might check out the Powerscore forums too. A Powerscore rep seems to respond to every response given by a student.
Hope that helps!
Hi! What PTs will be used in the coarse and assigned for homework?
Get it girl! So proud of you. Congratulations, and thanks for the inspo!!!
These inference questions always mess me up. But if an inference should be 100% provable, like a Must Be True question, then D is the more provable answer choice.
Paragraph 3 discusses, exactly what Answer choice D says but uses different descriptors.
"The work of Mexican writers is...marked by greater cosmopolitanism...Not surprisingly, the Mexican literary community views Mexican American literature as a variety of "regional" writing."
Cosmopolitanism is used as a different word for "urban" theme. The inference comes from inferring that the cosmopolitanism is preferred over Mexican regional writing. Since they look down on regional Mexican American literature, we would assume they would look down on Mexican regional literature too.
"Not surprisingly" also indicates an author viewpoint, and perhaps I should have highlighted/noted that while reading as potential question regarding viewpoint.
Answer choice C, on the other hand, is more strongly worded and not provable. "Predominant strength" is too strongly worded. It could be, but it's not 100% provable. Also, the 2nd half of the answer being "free to experiment" doesn't seem wholly supported. If they are free to experiment, why are they sticking to agrarian themes and a simple structures?
D seems like the more provable and safer choice.
Overall, this passage was not too bad, but they really try to mess you up by discussing Mexican vs. Mexican American lit and weaving the discussions of both and those similar words throughout.
thank you!
interested, thank you!