Subscription pricing
Is there a page/link?
PT Questions
saluskim2014493
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
saluskim2014493
Thursday, May 28 2020
Could someone post the email they got? I didn't get one...
saluskim2014493
Tuesday, Apr 21 2020
I'm interested in getting enrolled! Thank you to the person who donated and to 7Sage in its entirety. I've had nothing but positive experiences :smile:
On the real exam, can you change the timer countdown so that it counts up to 35 minutes rather than show how much time is remaining in the section?
saluskim2014493
Wednesday, Mar 17 2021
@ @ I'm pretty sure June counts for next cycle's limit so you could take it as long as you're not violating the lifetime rule. Look under "How many times may I take the LSAT?" here: https://www.lsac.org/lsat/taking-lsat/lsat-faqs
saluskim2014493
Sunday, Jun 14 2020
PT 89 psg 4 is comparative
I haven't come across any I've had to diagram and was wondering how common it is to diagram them and if anyone has examples of these in actual LR questions!
When it asks about the primary function of a specific paragraph, should we pick the answer that connects it back to the whole psg/MP or the answer that relates it to one part (like the paragraph at hand is meant to exemplify the last sentence of the previous paragraph or something like that but that in turn is meant to support the MP)?
And when it asks about the primary function of a specific word or line, should we pick the answer that connects it back to its role in the paragraph it's in or the answer that relates back to the whole psg/MP?
Also is there a difference in the approach if it asks about the "primary function" versus "function?"
I'm finding myself taking a bit longer and getting these function questions wrong and would appreciate any insight or method that helped you!
saluskim2014493
Wednesday, Oct 09 2019
#help
Could someone please explain in a different way why D is wrong for #16?
MUST the doctor (the author) first explicitly correct the misdiagnosis before prescribing medication? When I read D, I assumed that it's equally possible to interpret it as a situation in which the doctor corrected the misdiagnosis and then prescribed medication for the correct diagnosis.
Is this too big of an assumption to make?
I also thought the "data" in A was analogous to essentially the entire 3rd paragraph minus the 1st sentence (which is obviously the conclusion) so I immediately eliminated A. How can we parse through the paragraph and decide what counts as data?
saluskim2014493
Saturday, Sep 07 2019
#help
I picked C originally but then switched to E during BR.
For C, I thought you couldn't assume that just because most of the workers who get injured filed for comp the same day that those who don't file the same day are more likely to be lying (because what if they all just happen to have valid reasons for not filing while still working - like the situations mentioned in A, B, and D)?
I thought the assumption required in E (that the workers were aware the factory was closing) was a much bigger jump than the jump required for C (which is that the workers who didn't file until after the factory closed had valid reasons not to file the day of).
Am I missing something?
Do they not exist?
saluskim2014493
Wednesday, Oct 02 2019
If regular tv watchers are much more likely than other people to be regular newspaper readers then we can't confidently say the premises (tv = careful discussion of public issues disappears, newspaper = maintain careful discussion of public issues) support the conclusion (that regularly watching tv, unlike regularly reading the newspaper, increases tendency to oversimplify public issues). If it's the same people regularly doing both activities, how can we be so certain that they're more likely to think of public issues in oversimplified terms (the effects of tv) rather than maintain careful discussion of public issues (the effects of newspaper)? We don't and this is exactly how A weakens the support the premises give the conclusion.
D has no impact on the argument. It just says that equal time is given to each side. But it doesn't address the problem with tv news programs, which is that they allot too little time (only 30 seconds) to each side and so watchers only get a superficial understanding that reduces careful discussion. Who's to say that they'll have a greater understanding after hearing multiple views? If it's still 30 seconds, maybe they'll just remember another slogan. You would have to make a lot of assumptions to make D right.
Is there a downside if the score is lower?