To me, lawgic seems to be a formulated way to decipher arguments for those who cannot automatically do so in their head. If you were to use scratch paper and write down lawgic when going through arguments while taking the test, not only would it waste time, it also would train your brain to be dependent on that way of deciphering arguments. It is not for everyone and does not have to be.

I feel like lawgic is a nice concept to briefly go over but I do not find it necessary in order to understand arguments in the LSAT better. If anything, it would waste more valuable time during the test to use lawgic

Is it even worth reading all of these passages before continuing onto exercises and practice tests again after the diagnostic? I feel like I am reading a bunch but am not able to apply any of it right after learning about it.