Hey guys! A comparative passage question-

I recently watched J.Y.'s explanation for PT 75, and he stated that he tried and really liked the strategy of reading passage A, trying to eliminate answer choices based on his reading of only passage A, then going back to passage B and finally finish answering the questions.

I have never done this before, and was wondering if anyone else had/ if they suggest doing this.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-47-section-3-question-19/

When you encounter the word "contributes" on the LSAT, do you take this to be a "causation" word? For example, if I tell you that "high cholesterol contributes to heart disease". Would you say that high cholesterol is a cause of heart disease? I always have assumed so, but PT 47, S3, Q19 threw me off by equating "contributes" (which I thought implies causation) to "is associated with" (which I thought implies mere correlation).

The word "is associated with" was on the stimulus, and the word "contributes" was in the correct answer (C). I did not choose this answer because I thought that I would be making an assumption from correlation to causation by picking it.

Hey guys! Just wanted to ask what you think the best resources for Logical Reasoning are out there. I would especially like to work on parallel reasoning/ flaw, and logic heavy questions (they tend to slow me down when I diagram them). I have read the LR Bible, seen the 7Sage videos, and done PTs. Thank you!

This might be a really obvious question, but: if a given LSAT has a less rigorous section, is it usually compensated by a very difficult section of another type? I find that when games are easy, reading comp is a lot harder.

Hey everybody! 180 Watch is backordering until Oct, and I need a watch for Sept 27.

1. Are you selling your 180 watch? Please let me know melina.debona@gmail.com ASAP. I'm willing to pay full price.

2. Also, opinions? https://lsatmax.com/watch/