Self-study
Can anyone explain why PTJ07 is titled so differently from other LSAT titles? Is there a difference from other PrepTests?
PT Questions
gabrielterry18461
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
gabrielterry18461
Wednesday, Jul 19 2023
This whole question played out more like an SA question rather than a Reconcile question...
gabrielterry18461
Tuesday, Jul 11 2023
I literally wrote a comment on a question just like this 2 days ago!!! I have been traumatized to not pick (a) on the lsat especially if the answer is found in the first sentence especially if the correct answer choice is (a) especially if the stem is a main point question and especially if it’s a #20 wtffff
P.S. If you want to see my comment that I'm referring to, it can be found in PT84 S2 Q15
gabrielterry18461
Saturday, Jul 08 2023
I have been traumatized to not pick (A) from the LSAT. I can't count the number of times I got a question wrong because it was "too obvious". The fact that you can identify the correct answer in the first sentence AND have it as the first answer choice AND it's a #15 AND it's a Main Point Question is literally an "F-you" from the LSAT test-makers. I am questioning everything I have known
gabrielterry18461
Wednesday, Jul 05 2023
Confused as to why JY wrote the argument like that. Isn't the argument structure supposed to be
P
P->C
====
C
Why did he write it as
P
C->P
====
C
I get that there's a "not" symbol but if the "not" symbol were to appear in the conclusion of another question, should we follow the same argument format? #help
gabrielterry18461
Saturday, Jul 01 2023
Same as your thought process, I knew I wanted an AC that offered an alternative explanation and got to (B). I eliminated A on the basis that I knew I had to focus on why the the Lake Stickleback grew large in the first place.
I was ready to dismiss anything that had to do with the Ocean Stickleback because anything tying back to the Ocean Stickleback (i.e. the armor) was not relevant to weaken the support between the premise and conclusion. Seems counterintuitive but let me explain.
The conclusion is "Having a larger size is better for defense against the Lake Stickleback's predators than armor"
The premise supporting this conclusion is "Armor limits the Stickleback's growth"
The support in the argument would assume that the adaptation to allow the Stickleback to grow larger is ONLY to have a better defense against the lake's predators.
*One thing to note is that whenever the LSAT gives an explanation for a phenomenon, it is only because they have eliminated all other possibilities.
So going back to the thought process we had in the beginning all we have to do is give another explanation as to why the Lake Stickleback grew large in the first place which is why I chose to eliminate (A) in the first place. Although it may be true that armor slows the Stickleback, it does not specify if those predators are in the ocean or the lake. And (B) seemed to be the best answer as it aligned with my pre-phrasing and focused on the lake stickleback who is the subject of the argument.
gabrielterry18461
Tuesday, May 23 2023
Was it me or did everything after "for the vote of any given individual..." seem harder to conceptualize? If you choose to reply, please be brutally honest, I need to know if I'm lacking in my reading comprehension haha
I understood it after reading it a second time but man, the LSAT test-makers really have mastered the English language.
gabrielterry18461
Monday, Mar 06 2023
To those that found this a bit challenging:
1) I first found the conclusion which was "We cannot in any real sense mistreat plants"
2) Then translate each concept into Lawgic
P→/NS→/EP
_
P→/M
3) Then I inferred that it logically follows that I was missing "/M" after the "/EP". Because with that addition, I'm able to make the argument valid. So I know the answer would either be "/EP→/M" or the contrapositive "M→EP"
4) Then I found that answer choice D had the contrapositive "M→EP" which led me to selecting the right answer choice.
EDIT: Additionally keep in mind the Group 1,2,3,4 lessons we learned earlier. "All" (Group 1) is always followed by the SC and "Only" (Group 2) is always followed by the NC. So when dealing with answer choices that have "Any" and "Only"make sure to put each idea in their respective SC and NC places.
gabrielterry18461
Wednesday, Feb 08 2023
Unless you are very familiar with the fundamentals each section, one for example being main point questions, I would advise against mixing sections in one practice session. This means you should consistently be getting a maximum of 1 or 2 wrong in those section drills. Through repetition, you should able to answer the question almost subconsciously. And what I mean by answering subconsciously is that you've internalized the advice given for that section and you are able to almost immediately point out the answer without consciously referring to previous notes. Because the LSAT already forces you to switch your way of thinking multiple times, I believe that it is best to be able to make that unconscious switch rather than spending energy and time to remember your notes and tips. And keep doing this until you master all the concepts of the LSAT.
However, if you are very familiar with the fundamentals of each section, then I see no harm in mixing sections as that's what you'll be doing in the LSAT obviously. And the more comfortable you are taking practice tests while getting good results, the less stressful you should be going into the LSAT. If you are however, still getting unsatisfactory results, hammer down on the section until you master it.
gabrielterry18461
Monday, Feb 06 2023
#help
I have been using indicators to help me with identifying the conclusion, but there are questions like these that lead me to the wrong conclusion. For this one, I used the "but" at the end of the passage as an indicator to separate context from the argument and had "no increases in temperature unrelated to weather have been detected following earthquakes"as what I believed to be the Main Point.
It seems like indicators are a good tool to use, but not essentially the most reliable. The one piece of advice that I learned from this course that has never failed was asking "why should I believe this sentence?"
Is this an instance of just needing more LSAT experience to be able to use appropriate indicators to find the correct Main Point? Or is there prioritization method that I should use? For example, like in this passage, even though there is a "but" indicator, I would firstly still have to be able to answer the question "Why should I believe this sentence?"
I hate this passage. I just finished pretest 59 and this was the only passage in the RC section where I had wrong answers. I literally ended up getting everything wrong in this passage except for one question. Screw Noguchi, Brancusi, Fuller, Ford, positive lighting, and negative lighting. UGGGGGHH