hope this helps

Negating isn’t about making the opposite true.

Instead, you’re breaking the relationship between the conditions.

How to negate a conditional ("If P, then Q"):

To negate it, say:

"P happens, but Q does not happen."

(This breaks the promise that P always leads to Q.)

Shortcut for negating quantifiers:

"All" becomes "Some not."

Example: "All cats are furry" → "Some cats are not furry."

"Some" becomes "None."

Example: "Some cats are furry" → "No cats are furry."

Key idea for conditionals:

You’re saying the sufficient condition (P) occurs without the necessary condition (Q).

Example:

Original: "If it rains, then the ground gets wet."

Negation: "It rains, but the ground doesn’t get wet."

This avoids flipping everything to the opposite while focusing on breaking the relationship.

i am forcing myself to 1) identify the argument structure + type of argument 2) summarize the argument in one sentence 3) find the gap 4) Answer -> i am getting caught up in the details and when i go to answer the question i am just lost and cant identify the gap.

Looks like it's time for me to call it a night! The more tools and frameworks I pick up, the more the "how-to" instructions seem to slip from my memory.

the one part that i do not get is why shift ""ÖpNo backward with "B10+" and not the ""R

so why not B10+ AND R -> OpNo INSTEAD of B10+ AND OpNo -> R

the explanation might be right in front of me, but I am brain fried.

Do you attempt to solve unanswered questions during blind review after completing a timed practice test?

I'm pissed. i picked D and ruled out C with so much confidence LOLOL

good reminder!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgIN0YimDow

this passage made me feel like a caveman who just discovered fire, standing in a room full of art snobs debating the deeper meaning of a squiggly line.

I struggle to articulate information clearly unless I create a detailed blueprint of the passage—writing down specific main points and reviewing what I’ve read. This approach took me 30 minutes for this passage, but I answered all the questions correctly. I have no idea how I’ll build the speed to do it in 10 minutes, but for now, I’m prioritizing accuracy. Trying to catch up with time feels overwhelming, and the impact on my performance and self-esteem is significant.

Look at "most" and "guarantee" and say you Mother F*. we do not need more ambiguity man!

there is no way I would have gotten this right, if I didn't jump into eliminating wrong answers first LOL.

/Process of elimination -> / right answer

seeing this all come together when solving is mind blowing lol

I found this passage easy because I could visualize it, whereas the last one was harder for me to even process. The LSAT is really messing with my emotions—I actually cried realizing that I’m not a complete idiot LOL.

It's easier to avoid letting your own thoughts or opinions interfere when selecting an answer by reading each choice and mentally asking, "BUT WHY?" Then, turn back to the stimulus for support.

One day, I feel confident in my LSAT abilities—like I’ve got it all figured out. The next day, not so much. It’s like dating someone avoidant—just when I think I’m making progress, it pulls away.

i picked C .... got bamboozled geographically.

That question made my eyebrows raise—even through the Botox in my forehead.

Taking the time to carefully translate and understand the stimulus increases my chances of selecting the correct answer. I focus on thoroughly comprehending the passage, and that is my main focus when reviewing the answer choices. I also make sure to highlight indicators to avoid selecting the wrong answer. I tend to fall short when i do not focus on indicators also. it changes the meaning almost instantly.

This helped

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryr4WwGtK7Q

do people put the level of difficulty as "hard" or "medium"when you choose drills

I am scared.

Whenever you might mix up correlation and causation, you can think of parallel parking as a metaphor for correlation. In parallel parking, things happen alongside each other, but that doesn't necessarily mean that one thing causes the other. It's more of an intertwined relationship where the result of one can increase, decrease, or not exist at all depending on the relationship between the two, but it doesn't suggest a cause-and-effect dynamic.

I’m down