I realize that "d" is the (a) right answer.

But I can't figure why "c" isn't just as good, if not better.

To fill the logic gap, I need to establish that "forgone pleasures" were both desired and would have been regretted. C does exactly that.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-31-section-2-question-10/

Probs gna make a reference in the portfolio.

But in all seriousness, I'm addicted.

I am really struggling on making these distinct. I can recognize the stems, but the answers are gnarly for me.

Any advice? I am going through the trainer right now, and I'll have to review, but he seems to be rather brief on these, especially Required vs. Sufficient.

The biggest clue I can read is that the sufficient answers can be crazy, and mention weird things. But, obviously, this is not enough. I am totes struggling, and any help is appreciated. I'm thinking I should get Cambridge now.

Beans.

(via Trainer)

Find assumption to make legit:

Kermit is a frog. Therefore, he love green long time.

Right: One is a frog only if one loves green. Translation: In order to be a frog one must love salsa verde.

Wrong: One loves green only if one is a frog. Translation: All the salsa verde lovers, are frogs. (but not all the frogs love verde salsa)

I'm struggling with translating the "wrong" statement. It just don't make no sense ricky bobby, and the worst part is it did two days ago. When I don't intentionally think about for like 2 minutes, it seems like the right and wrong statement are saying the same thing.

I know that "if" statements read left to right and "only if" states read right to left (or you just move the if in front of the first clause), but it's hard for me to understand.

This has probably been covered before...but advice is best only if it is fresh. (see what I did there. see it.)

Can someone post a link where I can get some info on these things beyond LSAT/GPA?

Confession: I am a free user, mooching off of this discussion forum.

I am going through the The LSAT Trainer and once I finish, I'll take 3 diagnostics. From there I will most likely go through the Power Score books in all of the sections I am missing more than 3-5 in. Finally, I will get a private tutor for 10-15 hours to help me identify specifically what I struggle with (either question types or time) and how to attack it (accepting offers for tutoring hah).

Questions:

1. Recently, I saw in a thread someone mention doing the Trainer with 7sages program. Do they compliment each other well? Can someone tell me if 7sage is worth investing in considering I already brought all these other books before I found out about 7sage? I am already on the fence considering the explanations of each PT may prove to be invaluable.

2. What Cambridge books should I get? (links appreciated) I only just saw these in a thread 5 minutes ago. Are they for helping with time. Tell me more about these please.

3. (Kind of dumb) I haven't started studying reading comprehension, but no one anywhere seems to be that concerned with it even though its 50% of the test. Is it really that much easier than the others?

Thanks and 180s for all!

Rule: "J will arrive after M or before N, but not both"

Correct translation: N and M arrive before J or they both arrive after J.

(N- J) (J-N)

or

(M- J) (J-M)

Question: Why can't the translation be (N - J - M)?

Here J is neither after M nor before N.

I'm sure this is on the website and has been answered before, but I'm the worst incarnate so:

Are the practice questions in the curriculum taken from older LSATs (1-40) or newer?

I don't want to ruin my PTs by pre-exposure as I have a ballin' memory with answers in multiple choice...if only my brain powers were in concepts and not memorization.

Here are three of mine. If you're feeling it, list some of yours to help a brother out.

1. Big dreams take time - society demands that you be more impressive and they demand it now; LSAC demands that you be more impressive, but at a time convenient to you.

2. To clean your room well, it must first get dirtier. Decide how clean you want the room, and stay committed as the dirt reveals itself. Anticipate failure because if it was easy, it wouldn't be worth your ambition.

3. Your value as a human being is not determined by LSAC or by the expectations of your peers.

"Which one of the following most logically completes the passage?"

The Trainer puts these guys with inference questions, which totally makes sense.

The Bible puts these guys with identify the main point, which doesn't make sense at first. But, the question is, does this work? Is it "okay" to think about fill in the blank questions as identify the conclusion instead of inference. I feel like it makes the question seem less daunting and it works. In fact, I think it works better than the Trainer. Whereas a fill in the blank is only concerned with the conclusion, inference questions want anything that must be true in reference to any part of the passage.

Are there any ways this could be troubling that I am not considering?

So, despite my confident suspicion that 7sage pwns PowerScore, I still bought the LR Bible cuz it was "only" $40 bucks. But, after having read the first couple chapters, I am totes concerned. I have read multiple "How I got a 180" etc. articles, and a lot of those people used powerscore. Bless their hearts because dang doe. In two chapters I have gotten a lot of the basics which I guess are necessary for the first 2 chapters. But it seems that the way this book is mapped out, where its heading, is extremely inefficient and odd (categorization), though admittedly quite exhaustive. (Exhaustive at this point is what I am looking for. I have finished the Trainer and twas excellent, but I need some more detes on my weak question types).

Given my circumstance, am I going to benefit from the time I put into this book? I really do prefer book learning to video learning, for multiple reasons---time efficiency being one of them. I would like to keep the Trainer as my main template and incorporate detes from LR Bible. My LR is pretty low, too low to be honest about publicly. But I have only done one PT, and a lot will come naturally with practice and mental endurance. However, I would hate to establish bad habits in PTing or inefficient habits in theory with the Bible. I am taking the October LSAT and completely plan on 170 or 173 +, and I am studying more than full time.

Punchline: Do I continue with the LR Bible? will it give me new insights and the deh-tails I need to fill specific, tiny wholes in the Trainer, even if its overall structure is wackasblackcrackonthesalerack?

Answering required assumption questions like:

"I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for a right answer, I can tell you I don't have a very good memory, but what I do have are a very particular set of skills. Skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you show me the trap (those darned sufficient assumption options), that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you and I will kill you."

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-24-section-2-question-21/

Obvi not C, D, E.

Need help on making A and B distinct. Need a strategy on how to decode the false double negative on all LSAT wording. Need help on answering the question. Thanks

A. No effective law is unenforceable

B. All enforceable laws are effective

Why A? And why not E?

I think I misinterpretted "addressing" in option A to mean that "referring to the..." Instead, by "address" I now think he means "considering and potentially implementing the critics claims doesn't matter yet cause now we need money."

In regards to "E" I interpreted it to mean that, "giving the report a single focus ('coherent vision of future') is less desirable than the critics claim seeing as we need some effing money." However, the true translation is "the author thought the critic's idea wasn't that awesome."

Did I just totally misread what was said? Is my misreading completely unwarranted (Am I cray)? Any strategies on how to not to misread?

Are there any inaccuracies in this book? I am starting to get skeptic here, but I could just be cray cray.

I have some questions on how to make note taking and studying more efficient. (My apologies in advance for lack of tech lingo).

General: How do you incorporate tech into your study? I use Microsoft Word to take notes per question type and store my notes on iCloud for mobile review. I use quizlet for any concepts that may be drillable, that way I can have them in my pocket at all times. However, if I want to look at a specific question, I have to write down the questions location (25.3.20), put my notes below the location, then find either the hard copy of the question or use the question bank and look back and forth. Maybe I'm lazy, but I like to think my laziness inspires creativity and efficiency.

Specific: Related to the above, I am wondering if anyone has thought of a quicker, easier way to portably drill real lsat question besides cumbersome formatting and drilling on MW? There are some aspects of note taking that are much easier typing and others that are much easier with a pen. Does anyone know how I might get a digital copy of a question (any method that avoids scanning/printing) be able to type above and under it and write freely on the page (annotations, logic game boards) in a digital format, like with a bamboo digital writey thing or an iPad pro? I'm trying to find a digital, convenient, efficient, and portable way to jot down, review, and drill notes, with typing and free form writing next to/on real lsat questions. I really want to avoid difficult formatting (MW), inefficient drilling (MW), limited note taking ability (only typing), having to scan or print anything, or having to look back and forth from notes to question. I hope I'm making sense.

Most contrapositives makes sense to me except in the case of a negative condition, and positive reaction.

Can someone help me understand this example. (I don't think the rules are supposed to build off of each in this drill, so I've only listed the relevant one).

Scenario: A singer will perform, in order, five of seven songs: L, M, N, O, P, Q, and R.

"IF no L, then O." The answer (by negating and reversing clauses) according to a text book is "if no O, then L."

This doesn't seem true to me. There could be an L, but absence of O does not demand L. I have spent 30 minutes on this single example.

Help is greatly appreciated.

Because who doesn't love another study group post that only applies to (1% of 7sagers? (Yes, I tried the study buddy tool...which I humbly and respectfully advise be rid of inactive members).(/p)

I am essentially a noob looking for a faithful study buddy to go through CC with, to motivate each other, and teach each other LSAT stuffs. I'm shooting for a 170+ September or June if I'm crazy. I'm down for Skype too, but I don't know of any quality split screen sharing apps or websites. Let me know if you're down. I score around a 150 right now, and am cool if you're score is significantly higher or lower. I can learn much from teaching and listening.

Do i have to find these individually from some sketchy fifth party that wants my email before I can even see their webpage?

I am about to finish the Trainer and move on to my next phase of study. I am curious if anyone would be willing to send me notes, flash cards, etc. that they took from the trainer. This next week I'll be compiling my own study guide, and I don't want to miss anything. My email is mheannarino@gmail.com. Also, this is an email I use for spam so I can post it publicly and fret not.

Thanks

PS: If I hadn't purchased the Trainer myself, I wouldn't ask for notes. It doesn't seem ethical to me to reap from Kim without a financial thank you.

1. How far back is safe for me to take real LSATs? A little bit ago I read somewhere that anything before 40 is too different and can throw you off slightly. Spare me the preferences c-rap unless its insightful. Obviously there are obvious pros and cons to taking them all or just taking the last 30 for accuracy. I just want to know when the major changes in the test occurred. Thanks :)

2. People be crazy on here, studying for a year plus (aka I'm jealous of your planning and dedication and determination). I'll be putting in 4 months total, three months super serious like 50 hours a week minimum. I fully expect to get a 170+. I don't believe in PTing until I've finished all my coursework (Trainer, 2 Powerscores, and Cambridge drills 40 - 61, so I can't back this claim up whatsoever. After I finish I'll be doing at least 51-73/74 PTs, and probably 10 hours with a tutor. (Yes, I am totally fine with doing a PT a day). My point is this: Don't believe the gentle haters that so politely tell you can't or that you need more time. You got this, I got this. Watch a shia labeouf satire video and read a quote about persistence and necessary failure.

3. twoscoopsofpoop, seriously. I'm bearded balding overweight and I've accomplished all this at only 20. I'm totes down to study anything in the trainer now, or powerscores and PT/BR (not sure what BR means) starting Friday. Have a nice day, smiley face.