Yes, chase62442 , I really appreciate you explaining this! I didn't picture the whole essay's context when I did this question. I got the right answer, but I'm really trying to get a sound system of eliminating answers for RC & your explanation helped me do just that!

Im in Claremont by the Claremont Consortium. my PT was 152. I'd be happy to meet up.

Honestly, I think if you spend more times on less question, you PT score will go up, and youll be better at figuring out what youre doing wrong

Work on credible gains first...Like Me. I was PTing at 158-159 until I realized that If i actually spent time on 23 questions of LR instead of 25/6, I would miss only 2-3 a section.....thats the easiest way and its a method that isnt talked about much....you dont need to answer every question to get into the 160s...From there you just need to drill the questions you dont understand

Nobody can make you do anything...but considering how much money you paid for the prep, I imagine that this really isn't your real attitude regardless of whether you paid 159 to the Ultimate price). Anything you're having trouble on, just come out and say it. Ask for help! You're not the only one who struggles studying, I'm sure a lot of us on here have. But don't quit man. 5 weeks is a long long time. You can master whatever it is your having a hard time with if you would just ask.

I hope they do and quick though...if 7sage doesn't communicate something clear , just look at the Trainer.... it really does help in providing text based help, which is the only drawback of online learning

Not to be biased or redirect you, but reading the LSAT Trainer by Mike Kim (JY has vouched for him on this site) cleared up a lot concerning this question type.

The problem with NA is that you're not strengthening or weakening it, and also....a LOT of NA Arguments are really really dang close to valid (and in real world terms they seem perfect).....They are definitely pretty much all hard, no matter what number or how early they appear. So the most important thing is the five step thing that the Trainer teaches you...

1) Understand your Job (in this case find out what is wrong with the argument and find an AC true for the argument)

2) Finding the main point/Conclusion of the question

3) finding the support

4) Thinking about possible flaws!!! (this is huge, and it lead me from getting -11 on LR to -5 on a section, and ongoing)

4) Eliminating answer choices that aren't required (small hint, choices like Most, All, Some, Many, Few, usually aren't required)

The first one you have is right, the second translation is not.

Think about what it's saying. There MUST be "at least one". There is no most in there. At least one = some. (if this isn't making intutitive sense, review the valid argument forms (everything that not valid is invalid, so I wouldn't bother reviewing the invalid forms, but its your call). The main thing is that you have to realize pretty quickly that this isn't a valid argument format. Then you'll be fine.

You just have to be aware that it doesn't match the format of the the conclusion given in the stimulus. For this question, as long as you understand that two consecutive some(s) doesn't lead to a "A some C" conclusion (or a some & a most" for that matter, you're fine

This is right too, you just have to be aware that it doesn't match the format of the the conclusion given in the stimulus. For this question, as long as you understand that two consecutive some(s) doesn't lead to a "A some C" conclusion (or a some & a most" for that matter, you're fine

I did this through translation, did anybody else?

Damn, this is a good idea...I was just thinking how much cooler 7sage would be if they had campus reps (unpaid, who like interned for them)...it would be easier to get people together and so on..

I look at LSAT studying like playing a video game, maybe something like FIFA, or even Call of Duty. In the beginning of playing both games, you can adjust the difficulty of playing them so that you start at a beginner's level, so that you can adequately learn the fundamentals. Therefore, when you become good enough to so that the game gets much easier, you can change the level of difficulty. This cycle repeats itself, until one stops or reaches their peak level.

Now, unless you have some experience with soccer video games or shooting video games, it's going to take you a while to become proficient. But these games are so damn addicting, that most people don't even realize how long they're playing for, because video games have an inherent reward system built into them.

Ultimately, studying for the LSAT is no different than COD or FIFA, except the fact that you're under much more pressure, and the fact that you probably don't see aren immediate reaction or result to a strategy you used to answer a question or mark up a passage until you see the answers. But it is definitely more likely that the more you practice, the more your scores will improve.

Honestly, I just don't trust myself when it comes to selecting answers with E as the right choice... gotta get over that