Did anyone else catch that (B) is incorrrect also because it isn't "willfully breaking a specific law"? Protesting a law does not mean they are breaking that law. It's not the primary reason (B) is incorrect, but still fair to say?

#help (Added by Admin)

I find that there are two bridges in wording. The first one, where "internal coherence" is equated with "intelligible" or technically "unintelligible" is fine.

BUT I had a lot of trouble linking "sophisticated achievement" to "sophisticated music." I don't know if that's a fair leap to make. Because the achievement of a piece of music moving beyond just its original purpose is very different than saying the music itself is sophisticated. #help

Can I ask what the proctor interruptions were about? A friend of mine took the November test and she was interrupted very briefly due to issues like proctor wanted her to move some papers because he couldn't see them fully on screen (perfectly good reason to interrupt, still ruined her flow) and another time because she laughed out loud reading something and he said no talking, lol. She's definitely retaking test in Jan.

Congrats @matthewdegliobizzi545! Hope the Sep score is a good one too.

From reading a bunch of the comments below, I don't think JY is very clear here that this stimulus DOES NOT involve any conditional statements. Even though there are logical indicators present, the context of the stimulus means we cannot use conditional logic. Conditional logic is always holds. So past, present, future doesn't matter. If x, then y, no matter if it was yesterday, today or tomorrow. But just because x then y always occurred in the past, doesn't mean it will in the future. Reminds me of athletes or gamblers and superstitions. Just because you blew on the dice and won in the past doesn't mean you blow on the dice and win in the future.

Hi I was late to the call and didn't get the intro to the two wonderful panelists. Will you post who they are? I'd love to reach out just to say thank you.

Congrats @ajamal2479! And I'm so sorry to hear about your dad. But it seems like you are very resilient and I wish you all the success in the future!

And thank you so much for highlighting some other resources and WHY you found them helpful. Those two things you mentioned about the Loophole Method is what I found most helpful too (rest of the book I didn't particularly care for / didn't find it very helpful). Will have to check out KA too.

Hmm it's an app available for free in the Google or Apple stores.

I used it at one point. I loved that the trees (and eventually forest) visually laid out the work I put in for the day. And it's just aesthetically pleasing. I would highly recommend!

Thanks @tahurrrrr! I completely forgot that x ‑m→ y ‑m→ z does not mean x ←s→ z. I was trying to justify AC (C) when it's clearly an invalid argument form.

My assumption was that a member of BU17 of the government employees union was also a government employee. How else would you be able to be part of the government employees' union?? So the number of government employees in Hanson cannot be small compared to BU17 because members of BU17 are also government employees. In other words, BU17 is subsumed in government employees.

This question only makes sense if being a member of BU17 does not necessarily mean you are also a government employee. I guess you can work for a union that you are not a part of, like I can work for The Teamsters union as an accountant without being a Teamster myself. But the word "member" is also misleading then. Ugh. Am I reading too much into this? I just thought it was a poorly worded question. #help

Down for me as well #help

Congrats! And thank you for sharing about your long journey. Gives me hope and a little more motivation to persevere!

Agree with the other comments. You're not in a rush to apply, which is a huge luxury, so take the test when you feel ready. As someone recently posted (don't remember who it was exactly), study to a test score, not a test date.

Congrats! And thank you for sharing your hard-won wisdom. I'm going to immediately start skipping 3-4 questions on LR and see what happens. Put your advice to concrete use!

Yes in that each section builds up to the next one. So you need a really good foundation of arguments and logic before delving into question types. But if you're in a rush, I think if you're through most of the LR (you've done through the Advanced Logic section), you can do LG at the same time.

@lennono88883 How often do you go back to check your recordings? I found writing out my translations takes forever and my hand really hurts, so I started saying them out loud but not recording them.

instead slowly work towards a target score not a target test date

@jpoznan0587375 Great advice! And that's the approach I'm going to take from here on out, instead of setting a date and freaking out that my scores are not where I want them to be! If you're fortunate enough to not be on a deadline, then this is the way to go!

I'm doing Loophole right now, just started the Powerful Questions section. So far, not finding it that helpful, but we'll see.

Also I think a more helpful poll would be to ask of the people who have used both 7Sage and Loophole, did they think Loophole was helpful or not. Of course there's the sample bias as the poll would be on 7Sage's website. Can't help but think in LR flaw terms! :wink:

#help Seriously, I have the same question too. I got the question right by ignoring this, I still think the way the question is worded, the formal logic flaw is hard to apply. Because you're talking about two separate groups of things:

1) Houses on River Street that are Brick

2) Houses on River Street with Front Yards

There is overlap in 1 & 2, but they are still separate. All BH have FY, but not all FY are BH. So you can have 20 wooden houses, all with front yards, and they're the only ones with 2 stories. So you can't just arrow over from FY -m-> 2 stories.

Yeah the missing half of the conjunctive sufficient condition ("not difficult for them to do so") threw me off for A. I thought more people would've struggled with that.

@dimakyure869 said:

Take the test here then do your BR on lawhub. That way you retain all your data, but still get time on the lawhub interface.

Genius! :smiley:

Congrats on the end of your LSAT and admissions journey! Definitely envy you for that. I'm not anywhere close, but still but very happy for you, especially getting to your top choice!

I'm done with the cc and have moved onto Loophole. After 7Sage, I was testing at -3 to -7 consistently, but I couldn't get that down no matter how much I did practice sections and BRed. So I picked up Loophole. I'm currently doing basic translation drills and CLIR drills on full sections for practice. I've done 4 so I'll do at least 2 more before I move on to specific question types. It's definitely made me more attuned to flaws in arguments, and I can see that it's a good supplement to what I learned on 7Sage. Won't know the full effects til I'm done, but so far no regrets!

@hopje336 said:

It's funny too, because I read PS and the Loophole before coming to 7Sage and I think doing them first helped me absorb 7Sage better, than if I had done the reverse. But ... I'll never know :p ... and I'm a much better 'book learner' than 'webinar learner' anyways, where I can highlight, tag, and note.

@hopje336 I thought doing 7Sage first helped me get a really good foundation for formal logic and LR, so I believed doing 7Sage first was better. But like you, I guess I'll never know!

One thing is that there's a lot more material to drill on 7Sage, and JY's explanations (and the community's comments) are really helpful.

I am not an expert on this at all, but this doesn't seem like something you need to include. Unless of course you want the admissions people to know this is the most dangerous/outrageous thing you've ever done, implying that you are a good, rather boring average person. I'm not saying this sarcastically or in a mean way, as it may read like that. Just my two cents.

But it's not anything on record so it's up to you. But this doesn't seem like a serious issue to me.

@dimakyure869 said:

For me misc games are just about keeping your cool. If you need to, skip games and come back, and let the stimulus kind of process in your head a bit. Usually once you get the setup, misc games seem to be fairly doable. It's just kind of an extension of the same shock you get seeing a new logic game.

Thanks! Yeah I guess I knew that but I needed to hear it from someone else. It's crazy the variance in my performance depending on whether I feel confident or not.