Hello I have a question regarding the method of identifying an assumption. This is a strengthening question.

Context: Therapeutic intervention before the occurrence of mental disorders can mitigate factors known as major contributor to them.

Premise: A much more comprehensive research program is necessary to verify these results and allow for the design of specific health care measures.

Conclusion: In order to explore a potential means of cost-effectively helping people prone to mental disorders, we should increase funding for intervention research.

In order to find an assumption, I tried to see the gap between the premise and conclusion and found one gap that increase in funding for the research could lead to a much more comprehensive research program. With this in mind, I went to AC. But I could not find an answer that matches the assumption I drew. In the second shot of POE, through (C) I found that the author is assuming that by saying that the intervention research is cost effective the author is making an assumption that the research program is inexpensive compared to long-term treatment.

My question is, how come do I find the assumption that the right answer actually requires if that assumption cannot be drawn from the gap between the premise and the conclusion? Here, the claim that the research program is cost-effective seems to have nothing to do with the premise.

This question is part of CC.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-3-question-04/

Thank you.

Hello guys.

I am following Starter program, but kind of feeling that I need harder problem sets.

I geared my study towards June LSAT, but recently rethought the plan, and I am still considering whether I should switch it to Sep. LSAT.

In that situation, I am considering upgrading the curriculum into higher ones that include more difficult problem sets. But my concern is whether solving many difficult problems before going to PT would be actually helpful. I think that just studying without knowing weaknesses (which are usually exposed by timed PTs) is not that efficient. Also, since for 3 months I self-studied LSAT through LSAT Trainer and feel familiar with each question type (also by help of CC) I am not sure whether I should practice each question type mode deeply by doing a lot of problem sets. (I usually get 17/18 in a LR section.)

My plan for now is to first complete CC at the Starter level, go into PTs as soon as possible and then purchasing new problem sets so that I could practice where I am weak, which will turn out by PTs.

I just want to hear what you guys think who are experienced more than me at 7sage.

Thank you.

Hello guys.

I am a beginner in 7sages. I have studied LSAT for 3 months by LSAT Trainer. I recently found out this site and am now running on CC. I posted this because I think I need some advice on the direction of my study before I go further in the journey.

To begin with, I am currently gearing my study to June LSAT, and my average PT score goes 17/18 in LR, 19/20 in LG, and 22/23 in RC. My goal is from high 160 to low 170. Among other sections, LR keeps me from getting higher scores. The reason why I started to follow 7sages' CC was to improve my overall abilities in LR, which is the most hardest section for me in terms of accuracy and timing.

But as for RC and LG, I thought I could improve them by doing what I have done for practice. For LG, I did one section under 35 mins every day and checked 7sages video explanation for games that I had trouble in however little that trouble is. For RC, like LG, I did one section under 35 mins every day and checked what I got wrong.

This being said, is it a good idea for me to stop doing these and follow CC first for LG and RC?**** The reason why I ask this question is that I had not enough time to finish the whole curriculum including LG and RC before June and am just considering skipping LG and RC portions in CC. I just want to ask this question to those who found difference in 7sages curriculum especially in LG and RC.

Thank you.

Hi all

I cannot find any reason why (C) is wrong here.

It seems to me that (C) eliminates one alternative cause (genetic cause?) and thereby strengthen the argument that P-fat is responsible for the development of eyesight.

I compared (C) with (A) in S4Q17 in the same PT. (A) eliminates one possibility alternative by saying that "Earth did not pass through clouds of cosmic dust earlier than 800,000 years ago. This is because it negates an possibility that something other than fluctuation might have caused ice-age if the ice-age had occurred earlier than 800,000 years ago when the fluctuation started to happen. (A) turned out to strengthen the argument. Then, why does (C) not strengthen the argument? (I mean Q14)

Thank you very much

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-44-section-4-question-14/

Hello all,

I am a little bit confused with how to study LG.

In the foolproof lesson in our CC, J.Y. recommended watching video explanations right after you solve games, if you did not kill the games. Then, what about BR? Do we skip BR in case of LG? Because watching video explanations right after doing games means you do not do blind review or resolve the games on your own.

Any thoughts?

Thank you

Hello. I have some trouble in nailing this question.

(C) How could this strengthen the conclusion? The conclusion is about a causation between oval orbits and close encounter with other planets. But this answer choice is correlation; that is, it says that where planets are orbiting a distant star more than one planet are found near the star. I have learned that generally a mere correlation does not strengthen a causation.

(B) why is this answer choice wrong?

Thanks

Hello guys

At this point that June LSAT is coming, I am not clear about what I should do for the remaining one week.

My plan is to take a practice test (PT78) on Monday and for the rest of the week do individual sections.

The reason why I don't want to keep taking practice tests during the week is that I don't want to de-motivate or lose confidence in the case that my score turns out be bad. Also, doing individual sections can help me to fine tune and solidify strategies for each section and not exclude blind review.

Any feedback or thought is welcome.

I hope you guys have a victory in June LSAT

Thanks