Hi I am interested!

interested !!

Hi! I'm interested!!!

@ After doing about 4 sections of them I started to get used to it! Just try to read between the lines and really understand what they are saying, I've noticed that they are often using synonms in the AC to represent what is said in the stimulus, and I would mark them wrong because I thought it was out of scope but it was just saying the same thing in a weirder way!!

This sort of happened to me! You have to get used to the way they are wording stuff differently. I started to focus on LR from the 80s and soon got used to their language. One thing that helps me is usually when I'm down to two AC's, I read the stimulus again and then look at the AC. There is always one or two words that makes that AC wrong.

@ said:

I think about them like this:

The correct answer choice in an NA will be something that must exist in order for the conclusion to be true.

The correct answer choice in a SA will be an additional premise that, when added to the premises already provided, will enable the conclusion.

For what it's worth, I went -2 per LR on the real LSAT and had a -1 section average at the end of my studies.

Do you mind if I PM you!?

@ said:

I don't know how your process is with other question types but I had the same problems with NA questions and a two-part process really helped me get comfortable with them. A NA question is pretty much a type of STR question in that the right AC has to strengthen the argument. So before I look at the AC I do a quick pre-phrase and then look for ACs that strengthen the argument. This usually helps me get rid of two-three ACs. My next step is negation testing. Just plug in "it is not true that" in front of the answer AC and see what it does to the conclusion (conditionals are much easier cause you can just negate one side of the condition). If the negated AC totally wrecks the conclusion then it is the right AC. Feel free to PM me if you have any questions! Hope this helped!

That makes a lot of sense, I have never thought about it like that. I will try that out, thank you so much!

@ said:

Hi, @ Do you know what's throwing you off with these question types specifically? These question types tend to rely heavily on formal conditional logic--the very basics of the CC and Loophole (haven't read Powerscore or Trainer but I assume they have something similar). I would recommend reviewing the formal logic lessons from the CC. Do you map out the stimulus, especially for SA? Generally, these questions have two disconnected concepts and you need to draw the bridge between them, if that makes sense.

I am able to figure out the conclusion and premises, I just have a hard time digesting it I believe while putting them together. I drilled a bunch of the conditional logics and went back through the CC and actually found them fun, however when it's in the stimulus I just can't understand any of it.

Thank you so much that would mean A LOT. My avg score is between -7 to -9!

@ said:

What is your average LR score? I might be able to help