Hi All,

I apologize if this question has been already been asked before. For those of you who have already written the LSAT or are deep into PTing, I was wondering if you studied using any material other than just 7Sage (other than the LSAT Trainer)?

Basically, did you find that the curriculum of 7Sage was enough on its own (with appropriate drilling and PTing, of course)?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-49-section-1-game-1/

Can someone explain question 7 of this game to me?

I get how there are three possible worlds: _ _ N G I N ; N _ G I N _ ; N _ _ G I N

The question asks "...then a film in Norwegian must be shown on". Why is it JUST day 1 and 3. I mean, it could also be shown on day 5 (per the second option above) or day 6 (per the third option above). Why is option "Day 1 and 3" correct as opposed to "Day 1 and 5", which is incorrect?

Hi All,

I am currently signed up for the Ultimate package with 7Sage. After taking some time off, I am back to studying for LSAT. I noticed that 7Sage now has Ultimate+ (sorry if this has been out for a while and has already been discussed, but I just noticed it recently). Is an upgrade from Ultimate to Ultimate+ recommended? For anyone who has upgraded and been through the new offering, please let me know your thoughts and recommendations.

Thanks a lot for your time.

Hey Everyone,

Needed some help with this conditional statement.

"Deep empathy is required for full understanding of an individual's actions. Internal empathy will grant partial understanding, but only if the individual is open minded towards the process."

I have: Full Understanding ---> Deep Empathy ; (Internal Empathy --> Partial Understanding) --> Open Minded.

The question asks: Dina has acquired both deep and internal empathy of Barry, who is not open minded towards anything. Relative to Barry, Dina will gain: _________

So I know that it is unknown whether Dina will gain full understanding as she satisfies a necessary condition. But, will she also not gain partial understanding since the necessary condition is deinied (Barry is not open minded)??

How do we translate this statement and it's contrapositive: "Internal empathy will grant partial understanding, but only if the individual is open minded towards the process".

Any help would be great. Thanks for your time.

I'm prepping for the exam with a friend who has a pretty serious chronic illness. He has applied to get 25% extra time on the LSAT. Although I think that, given his illness, he deserves the added time, I'm confused whether that extra time can be of significant help. If he's approved, he'll get 8 extra minutes per section.

I haven't taken the exam yet but I understand that time constraint is one of the biggest challenge that the exam entails. However, I also believe that if you're not familiar with the exam by test day, those 8 extra minutes will never be enough. Him and I had a mini argument on this topic.

What're your thoughts on this? Especially the folks who have taken this dreadful exam previously.

Just wanted to reach out and thank everyone who suggested that one should incorporate the LSAT Trainer as part of their studies.

I actually bought the book last year but didn't touch it until last week and I quickly realized how well put together this book really is. It's as if this book knows the mindset of the student and trains you exactly how to go about studying for this darn test. It builds upon each section slowly but picks up exactly when it should.

Mike, if you're ever around here and read this, just want to say that you're the Aristotle of the LSAT world. Or, the coach from that mighty ducks movie (ah I forgot his name). Simply put, you're a genius.

To anyone having second thoughts about picking this book, please do yourself a favour and buy this book. You'll not regret it. I double-triple promise.

I got a stellar, a magnifient score of...154...YAYY!

I am actually happy with this score because of a few reasons:

1) I did not do even a single prep test in its entirety during my study. None at all. I did not even do a diagnostic test. All the tests past PT35 are pristine for me.

2) I did not even complete the 7sage curriculum (think I was at like 48%).

3) I did not practice more than 30 games in total. Also, I did not practice more than 8 RC passages in total.

4) I did not touch any prep material in the last month before the test. Also, my study was very passive before that.

5) I completely guessed on 10 RC questions (complete last RC passage as I spent my whole time on that damn Eileen Grey passage).

6) I completely guessed on entire virus game and 4 four questions from previous games.

Now, my real prep will start. Time to raise that 154 by atleast 16 points :P ... let's get it done.

It's going to be three hours since it went grey, but I don't have a score (and an email) yet. Is anyone else in the same boat? Sighhhhh...

Hey Guys,

Needed some help with diagramming a couple of sentences into lawgic and their contraceptives.

1. If Aliens or Ghosts are in the house, then Tim and John are not in the house...Is the info I have written below correct?

- The way I have diagrammed this is like: A or G --> /T and /J. Taken further, this becomes: A --> /T, A --> /J ; G --> /T, G --> J. If Aliens are in the house, then Tom is not there. If Aliens are in the house, then John is not there. If Ghosts are in the house, then Tom is not there. If Ghosts are in the house, then John is not there.

- Contrapositive: T or J --> /A and /G. Taken further, this becomes: T --> /A, T --> /G ; J --> /A, J --> /G. If Tom is in the house, then Aliens are not the house. If Tom is in the house, then Ghosts are not in the house. If John is in the house, then Aliens are not in the house. If John is in the house, then Ghosts are in the house.

2. Totally confused about diagramming "Tom will play really well for his soccer team if John or Bill, but not both, play on the same team as him."

I understand that John or Bill, but not both will be diagrammed as /J (--) B, where contrapositive is J (--) /B. But how do I diagram the info about Tom. Is this correct? /J (--) B --> T? If yes, what will be the contrapositive?

Thanks for your help, as always.

Hi All,

I think I'm good with the Logic Games theory and I'm about to start the Logic Games bundle.

For those who have already done it, approximately how long did it take you to get through it all, including the fool proof method?

Thank you for your time.

Decided to take a break from LSAT study and came across this sketch on YouTube.

Hope you guys do really well on the LSAT and in law school, but not become anything like Jason Grey???

So, I totally understand why Powerscore books are not recommended and why the LSAT Trainer is. However, has anyone used the Manhattan books...especially their Logic Games book? A friend of mine (who is now done with the LSAT) gave me his Manhattan books to go over. From my research, I think they're recommended more than the Powerscore Bibles. I also read that Mike Kim had co-authored these books. Any thoughts on them?

Hey All,

Had a question that I was confused about. Statement is, "People who aren't handsome are happy". Isn't the logical indicator "not" here, meaning it is in group 4 (Negate Necessary). Translated into lawgic, shouldn't this be, "Happy -> /Handsome ; Handsome -> /Happy". However, in the lessons, I found it to be " /Handsome -> Happy ; /Happy -> Handsome".

Any help would be appreciated. Thank you for reading this.

Hey All,

So I started the 7Sage curriculum about three months ago but left it very quickly because of some other constraints. However, I have come back to the curriculum now and am slowly going through it. There is a big difference now as compared to back then in terms of my learning. I am able to understand and apply the concepts much better than before. Upon reflection, I think one of the primary reasons why this is happening is because I am engaging with the comments of the lessons section a lot more. It truly helps when you can grasp the lesson concepts and contribute to the comments section by either answering others' questions or commenting something of use for others to view.

Another thing I saw were comments of people who were going through the lessons at the time and are now doing extremely well as per their success stories on this forum. I hope to be in the same level soon, if possible. It truly shows that hard work and time dedication during lessons does pay off at the end.

I also wanted to acknowledge and thank the many selfless commenters who have answered the questions that many users had in the past. It definitely helps students like myself who are going through the curriculum now to understand the materials thoroughly.

I promise Lindt Chocolates to everyone!

Hello 7Sage Users/Administrators,

I didn't know who to address this to, but as I am going through the course, I am finding that the comments section of the course videos is, most of the times, equally helpful as the videos themselves.

Some of the comments are very very helpful in understanding the material better. Most of these helpful comments are popular, given the number of "likes" that they have. However, some lessons have close to a hundred comments and it's difficult sorting through them to find the most helpful (or most liked). I was wondering if an update can be made to the comments section where users can sort them by "newest first" and "most popular". That way, the most helpful ones can be at the top and easier to find. Of course, some of the most liked comments are also humourous and thought provoking, which I wouldn't mind reading as well, hehe.

Well that was it. Back to the videos. Hope everyone has a nice day.

Hey All,

Can anyone help me with this question (PT27 S4 Q15). This one is confusing and bothering me at the same time.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-4-question-15

The passage says "It is often said that beauty is subjective. But this judgement has to be false..." From what I understand, the author is saying that beauty isn't subjective (meaning, your opinion will be different from my opinion about what we consider to be beautiful). We are asked to weaken this argument where the correct answer is "C" (Our own standard of beauty was strongly influenced by our exposure to works that were considered beautiful in other cultures").

Doesn't that actually strengthen the argument rather than weaken it? If my standard of beautiful art was shaped by what my art teacher thinks is beautiful art, then that means that I am just following her opinion and have no say of my own (therefore, my opinion is not subjective at all), which actually strengthens the argument.

I know I am missing something but am totally confused as to what it is. Any help would be appreciated :)

Hi All,

I will be writing my LSAT in September and, hopefully, will be applying to law schools shortly afterwards to start law school in Fall 2017.

Some context: I suffer from a chronic illness that has impacted my grades in undergrad. I had more hospitalizations/ER visits than I had semesters in all of my undergrad program. However, as I learned to cope with my illness, my grades improved. All in all, I ended up with a 3.23 CGPA and a 3.5 in my last two years. I also worked at 3 of the largest banks while finishing undergrad as an intern (In Canada, we call them co-op programs, which are tough to get in and stay in). After finishing undergrad, I have worked in various capacities in finance, marketing, and branding at some of the largest Canadian and Multinational companies. I am currently working in strategy for a large packaged goods company. I also volunteer in my free time with various charities and have recently been asked to join the Community Advisory Council at the busiest hospital in Canada after I stood up for the rights of some patients whose care was being mis managed. All in all, I have had some great experiences during and after undergrad.

I have talked to all law schools in Canada, who have advised me to apply in their "Access Category". Basically, they have spaces reserved for people who have had to deal with extraordinary situations which has impacted their undergrad performance. I will need to fill a separate section in the application reserved for people applying in the access category. I will also need to provide documentation as proof. I will still need to be competitive to get into law schools, however, they will consider my condition before judging my undergrad performance.

I was wondering if the US law schools have any similar categories? Any help would be great and appreciated.

Thanks for your time. Hope you have a great weekend.

...HAPPY CANADA DAY!!!

Nothing better than enjoying Canada day by relaxing in the backyard and reading the good old (okay, not that old) LSAT Trainer.

To all my lovely fellow Canadians on here...Happy Canada Day!!!

No better way to celebrate Canada Day then to do some inference / must be true questions, followed by some Poutine in the afternoon !!

So, I'm a little confused about the inclusive "or". As an example, let's say that we have this statement: "Either John or Tom will attend the meeting". Translate that into lawgic and it becomes: "/J --> T" and "/T --> J".

What I don't understand is that the if the above lawgic is correct, how is this statement an inclusive or. If John attends, Tom won't attend and vice versa. But, as per the statement, we can easily see that they both can attend (statement doesn't say "but not both").

Can anyone shed some light on this. It could be (probably is) that my understanding of this concept is flawed.

Thank you!