- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Discussions
Hey everyone, my life has taken a turn recently. And at this moment I don't have the time to keep studying. That being said I plan to attack the LSAT again later in life when things cool down and I have the time to give it the attention is deserves. Thus, for now I don't want to continue paying $90 dollars a month for 7 sage, if i cancel but come back again later will 7 sage still recognize what I have covered, and where I am in the syllabus ? I don't want to lose my progress !!!
Anyone have experience with this ?
Thanks !
anyone care to explain why negating C doesn't destroy the argument ? I thought it did.
if i said the fossil record is incomplete then for all we know new info could come out tmrw that totally destroys the argument !? JY explaining why this isn't necessary didn't really resonate with me. Thoughts/advice ? #help
Just too clarify, AC (a) doesn't work because it contradicts one of the premises ? I figured the AC wrecked the argument when it was negated so that makes it the correct answer. So is it safe to say that when you negate a answer and it only contradicts a premise its not a good AC ? Thoughts please ? #help
so to get this straight, E is trying to contradict a premise which can't really be done ? there fore its not write ?
I took it as something that totally destroys the argument. So i chose that... any advice ? #help
doesn't negating A kill the argument completely ?
Also, isn't E more of a SA that helps to increase the argument ?!
explanation please ! #help
Hey everyone, I just completed the advanced logic lesson. Most of it made sense, until embedded conditionals.... Reviewing the intro to logic section. 7Sage said they are very rare but very hard.
I am just curious, how hung up should I get on the embedded conditionals stuff ? I suppose as it is the hardest logic lesson I shouldn't be so down about not having it stick after only a day or two of reading the advanced section. But that being said. I have watched the advanced logic section a couple times now, at this point I feel like I am just wasting time ! I am not trying to sound pompous but thus far nothing has ever really made me feel this stupid before and it has me questioning my whole study study plan.
Should I just forge ahead and hopefully this stuff will click with more time and practice/following more along the core curriculum ? In all honesty I am only shooting for a mid 150 range score, Is embedded conditionals worth stressing over ?
Other then that, If anyone has any advice or extra material on this stuff I am all ears. Thanks !
why isn't there a way to logic this ? at least the stimulus seems like it could be diagrammed quite easily.... ? #help
Also, can anyone explain to me why they didn't eliminate most of the answers due to all of the "Somes" that were present.
Thanks !
Hey everyone, is the best way to follow the CC just to go from top to bottom ?
And if so, are some of the topics laid out in the wrong order ?
I have routinely encountered videos or topics ( Parallel method of reasoning ) for example. Where JY says its the last or highest section of LR. But, I still have many other question types etc still to do below it. like necessary assumption question type. Did they rearrange the video order or something ? Im honestly confused and want to be learning the question types in the proper order, due to the fact that the topics snowball together ! Please help or advise !
that def makes more sense ! would it also make sense to not use some because its not the first word ? i.e some lawyers are cattle ranchers = L some CR whereas here orbits some planets, its not the first word in that little bit ? Or am i stretching and seeing something there that does not exist ?
why doesn't he make use of: "any" "some" "all" these are all indicators that make me write it down differently then him !
#help
Hey everyone, need some help here. The sufficient assumption questions are giving me a pretty hard time. I was curious where I should go back to and review that might help me with these ? I was going through the CC quite fine, Everything leading up to SA made percent sense, including the SA lesson itself. Even the general approach to these questions I found understandable.
But as soon as the actual practice questions started I have never felt more out of the loop. I find converting the questions into Lawgic quite difficult.
Any advice, on what to review or areas that might be a weak link that are making this question type difficult for me ?
Thanks !
these question types are making no sense to me, even though everything in the SA question type lesson made sense. Any suggestions on what to review ?
#help (Added by Admin)
Can anyone explain what "Argument Part" is about ?
Also, what the difference between "most strongly supported and strengthening" is ? Thanks ! #help
How long does it generally takes to get through most of the core curriculum until the point that you are doing strictly practice tests ? I do mean in such a way that you are actively learning and not attempting a speed run ! Obviously everyone learns at different speeds and has different schedules ! So feel free to ball park it or give a rough estimate.
I am just trying to figure out how much time I have to realistically learn before my test.
Thanks, and as always you rock !
sorry, so "not irrelevant" = "relevant" right ?
#help