yes, especially essays. I was reading Le Guin's wave of the mind everyday up until my LSAT.

why did i think "either" meant it is both at the same time.. even though that doesnt make sense at all..

@legallyhaya life goes on, id rather see my dreams thru than wait around .. sorry to anyone planning on a t14 i guess.

Yeah it's getting more competitive over the years. we're in a recession right now, so now in particular... yeahh... honestly I'm just setting my standards low

Why not D? 

Negated --> hatchery raised fish that are released into the wild DO NOT need to eat many different types of food to survive.  

So lets say their likeliness to try new food doesn’t help EXP fish. Yeah, now it seems way weaker to say they're more likely to survive bc of that trait. But they're still BOLDER. They could still potentially be better than TH fish at surviving in the wild because of their boldness. It doesn’t destroy the conclusion, just weakens it a lot by making one factor of the premise irrelevant.  

Why is it C?  

Negated --> No fish raised in traditional hatcheries (TH) die because they are too timid in foraging for their food.  

If no TH fish die due to not possessing the quality EXP fish have and apparently allows them to survive better, then why would TH fish be less likely to survive? It makes it impossible that TH fish are less likely to survive for not possessing that trait, so EXP fish would NOT be more likely.  

"Hey, so how come D is wrong for making only one factor irrelevant, but C is correct though it ignores difference in boldness?!"  

Remember timid is the opposite of bold also, I saw some people in the comments not understanding the link between bold/timid. It's reasonable that if the TH fish are the opposite of bold in foraging for food that they are overall less bold. Both factors are taken into consideration here.  

I think I honestly need to increase my general knowledge of economics at this point because my brain checked out at trying to understanding interest rates for lending.

@sandypickle yeah I do drills in sets of 5 minimum and 12 maximum (usually 5). if i consistently get them wrong, i go back on the syllabus and my notes to see where my thinking is wrong. everything in the syllabus genuinely helps, especially tests like the negation test for NA questions. the smaller drill sets for me mean im really just testing my logic, not my endurance. that i test only in PTs.

i guess im glad i got it wrong because i couldnt understand the future vs now flaw till now.

they require differnet mindsets entirely. drills are a sprint, prep tests are a marathon. additionally, doing drills with intention helps. are you keeping a wrong answer journal? if i do drills for a question type im weak at, i get less of them wrong the next time I take a PT

You don't have to do the blind review right away. click out, and when you go back to prep tests, it will be there for you to BR when you're ready.

I chose correct answer E but then switched to D because I thought my interpretation was too far. regret.

Reasoning for A: if author is putting in protocols for readers to read a certain way, then perhaps its determined by author intention? Both a and b passages talk about how the authors are writing in a manner where they intend the audience must read a certain way.

Reasoning for E: I realized the language in A was really strong, "fully determined" and it may not capture what the passage was saying at all.

E SEEMED closest to me, as in it was talking about protocols and ways the story could be engaged with and read. Now I see that this statement wasn’t made, but I thought it was at least consistent with both the passages, as in "there is an importance to what intention the story was written with"

Why not B: I dismissed B entirely because it didn’t look or sound like what I thought the correct answer should sound like. I didn’t take the time to see if it was logically consistent with.

TAKEAWAY:

• dont expect answers to look like something in particular

• dont impose meaning on answers that clearly say something else

Personally I like to read a good essay (not a news article) or a chapter of a well written book. always engages me.

Could someone let me know if i was wrong for ruiling out "wehnevr possible" because it doesnt specify how often possible is -

I got this wrong because "whenever possible" doesn't indicate how often it is possible. "Whenever possible" might mean everyday or once a year. I chose A because having the same doctors might mean those doctors could pass the same diseases they are exposed to, to the patients and if they work at both hospitals its possible. I guess I considered A because I recently read an article about people in hospitals for other reasons catching the flu or COVID due to improper masking from nurses and doctors. I thought it made more sense. No matter how much I turn it over in my head, A fails for the same reason D fails - it requires an assumption of possibility being frequent for D, and the assumption of irresponsible doctors for A.

damn ive been doing drills and tests alongside the syllabus these past few months. thought the point was to see them improve as you went throguh

as someone who prefers reading and practicing to watching the videos, i realllyyy wish this lesson also had the RC passage with the questions for me to practice it on my own.

@tar Just ask yourself if the answer is too strong. To say that ALL "critics who are compelled to categorize literary works" dismiss social vision entirely is too strong.

A critic could be compelled to categorize literary works, and this compulsion may make it hard for this critic to appreciate the social vision of a work - BUT, there is nothing in the passage to suggest social vision is entirely irrelevant to this entire group of critics.

@erarabiameyer youtube could pay them out; it's not like this is a serious part of 7sages curicculum, but just for fun.

i wish this was me.

@calliekoskovich depends on when youre giving the LSAT. ive skipped video explanations of answers ive gotten right UNLESS it took me a while to get the right answer OR im not following the method they reccommend.

12/13 again. there's always one.

its genuinely SO fucking hard to do an RC passage if its the most boring thing you ever read.

ughh I had D but then thought, 'what are the other siblings in this metaphor?' at least in a, i could think chess = explanation of dark matter, family member = explanation by neutrinos, book = further explanations