Hey, guys. Can anyone thing of a more recent game that has a rule like, “Only seats in the same row...”? Like who thought something like seats in row 1 and in row 2 could be immediately beside each other??? I guess that could happen if you diagrammed something like 123 with an aisle then 456 so 3 and 4 could be immediately beside each other and then 789 immediately behind 123??? I interpreted the rule to mean that no one can be assigned to a row by themselves and the middle seat can’t be empty because someone has to be seated immediately beside you. I diagrammed three rows on top of one another just as displayed in the game so I never thought of it any other way. I set up my game boards this way and missed questions because I misinterpreted it. Anyway, I’m venting because it seems dumb to me but can anyone think of something like this in more recent games?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-3-game-1/

Hey, guys! Has anyone ever felt like everything is starting to crumble for them? LG has always been my best section but now I can go -6! I get life and all that but OMG! I've been at this for far too long and it's time to pull the trigger already! It's not burnout. I take breaks whenever necessary. I was doing LG yesterday and actually had to go back to the curriculum to clarify a rule using group 3 and 4 indicators, smh. Thats 101! I know we have highs and lows but this is crazy and scary for me. Thoughts??

Hello, everyone. I’ve been drilling strengthening questions and I’m having an issue with causation/correlation and phenomenon type arguments. The lines have become blurred for me. Often times I cannot tell which the argument is presenting because they seem to be so similar but my accuracy with this question type has increased. I think I have a strong definition of the two but I’m having a tough time differentiating between the two when presented in arguments. I initially had PT 25-S2-Q10 as causation because I thought the argument was stating the ultraviolet light is causing the insects to be attracted to the webs but I changed to phenomenon because I figured that the insects being attracted to the webs because of the ultraviolet light is an observed phenomenon and the info about Glomosus spiderwebs was given as supporting evidence. Does “probably” give hint to anything here? I figured it would give hint to phenomenon rather than causation but idk if you can saying something “probably” caused something in causation/correlation type arguments. Either it did or it didn’t. When i hit the AC I’m looking for specific AC types depending on whether it’s a phenomenon or causation/correlation type argument. I haven’t come across many arguments by analogy. I haven’t paid attention but could there be both types of AC to trip you up? This is my greatest worry. For PT23-S2-Q14 I initially chose phenomenon but changed to causation. I got the question right but looking back I actually think it’s phenomenon. Which is it??! Also, please let me know if I’m doing too much with this question type. I’ve seen improvement but maybe I’m focusing on this too much and not something else enough. TIA

Hey, guys! I'm looking for advice. I started my studies without timing. When I found 7 Sage I continued to drill without timing. I'm now afraid of the clock. I will literally talk myself out of doing a PT because I'm scared of the clock. I can sit and take PTs all day without the clock but the moment I add the clock into the picture my whole thought process and strategy goes out the window. My scores are affected by this, obviously. I know my BR scores should be higher than the PT but there's a huge difference. Any suggestions? Obviously I need to just use the darn clock but give me something else. Anybody been in this situation? Anybody know what I can do to just forget the clock and stick to my game plan? I started by giving myself a min and some change on questions but that didn't seem to work. I was so scatter brained and my thoughts were all over the place. I was still not able to settle down and implement my game plan and strategy for that question type. This timing issue is also a huge reason why I keep pushing the test off. Help!!

Hey, all. I was recently having a convo with someone else studying for the test. The convo was regarding timed and untimed scores. I said that if one scores the same on a timed PT as on an untimed PT that indicates a lack in knowledge and fundamentals because untimed you have time to think out strategy and whatever else to get the correct answer but you still didn’t. The other person didn’t agree. What are your thoughts?

Hey, guys. Why is there talk of three M here when the rules say exactly two M? JY mentions three M and others also mentioned in the comments section. What am I missing here? Three M was never an option for me becatse of that rule.

Hey, guys! I haven't registered for CAS yet. Isn't this where you get your GPA? My undergrad GPA was 3.18 and my GPA from my paralegal certificate is 3.7. Is that considered grad school? Anybody have any insight and can possibly give me a rough estimate of what my GPA would be?

Howdy! I'm kinda iffy about what constitutes prescriptive. Could we say that "can be" is prescriptive? Or, is it just specifically what "should" be or what "ought" to be?

Ex. PT32-1-19

There is no genuinely altruistic behavior (descriptive). Behavior that appears to be altruistic can be understood as being motivated by the desire to reinforce that belief (prescriptive).

Can "can be" equal "ought" in this scenario? The more I think about it I say no. There was a scope shift. The conclusion states what "is" and the support states what "could" be interpreted, but not necessarily "ought". Do I have this correct?

Can anyone shed a little light on this one for me? I see now why the correct answer is correct but I chose C because I felt that it was blocking any alternate explanations for the prevented deaths. I thought that taking more trips and the total time in cars remaining constant would rule out saying deaths are being prevented because the kids are now in cars less than 8 yrs ago. Am I reaching here? The explanations I’ve read have said that the amount of time in cars is irrelevant. The only thing I’m seeing that sticks out now is “average total time”. Would that make a difference?

Shout out to @ryansoscia for the heads up!

http://imgur.com/O3bzEhU

Hey, yall! Would you say that AC B equals ambiguity? Sometimes I get equivocation and ambiguity mixed up but I eliminated equivocation here because "tax" isn't used differently throughout the passages. B basically says the author extended the meaning of tax to help or justify her claim (US residents pay for health care out of their pockets, whereas the service is paid by tax revenues in the other Western countries so US residents do indeed pay high taxes because they're the same). Does this quite qualify as ambiguous? I understand the ambiguity fallacy to mean that a word or phrase used in the argument is unclear. Is the term unclear or did the author just tweak it to mean what he/she wanted it to mean? I'm trying to get familiar with the different ways the LSAC can construct this type of fallacy as an AC. I didn't eliminate this AC but I also didn't choose it because I wasn't quite sure what it was actually saying.

Hey, yall. For weaken type questions do you think it's safe to double check your AC by determining if it precludes the conclusion from being properly drawn from the evidence? If not, it's not the correct AC. We have a way to double check NA AC why not for all?? Ugh! It's been a minute since I've gone through the curriculum so this may have been mentioned. My bad if so. I get the task for weaken questions: weaken the support between the premise and conclusion. I'm just trying to help it become more intuitive for me. Thoughts? Anyone think I could get turned around or confused in higher degree of difficulty questions?

Idk if I’ll actually be a juror just yet but would you guys chance it and go ahead and register? If I am selected do you think I’ll have to be in court on Saturday (12/2), or is that another gamble if I go ahead and register (deadline is Wednesday)? I’m also concerned about getting sufficient study time the week of the test and will it be too much to deal with going? What do you guys think? I’m sure somebody’s gonna say purposely get dismissed but give me something else! Lol

Hey, guys! Does anyone find strengthen questions harder than weaken questions? I'm not really sure if you should find one easier than the other but for some reason my brain says that strengthen should be easier than weaken. I get the task for strengthen questions but for some reason I'm having a harder time with strengthen than weaken questions.

Hey, guys! I would like any advice you guys can give on splitting boards. I seem to always spend too much time trying to split and it's not really needed or I don't spend enough time trying to split and I could've saved time. I tend to always end up brute forcing too much or using previous game boards from previous questions to answer questions but I know that's not always going to work for me. LG is my best section so I've kinda dismissed it but I'm not always -0 so I'm looking for pointers. Can you guys provide any hints on when to split and what to split on (meaning a specific rule like a not both rule or something)?

Hey, guys! I'm starting to work on my app process and I wondering if I should or how to write a DS? I was recently diagnosed with a cognitive disability. I haven't been in school since 07 so I haven't really had to deal with it in a learning setting but def at work and everyday situations. I also didn't have the issue until after I completed undergrad. Can or how can I write a DS statement if I haven't had to deal with the issue in a learning setting? Or, am I not looking at it the right way? Also, do you think that DS around learning disabilities hint that the writer may have received accommodations? I know we don't really know, but do you think this would help or hurt? Any suggestions are welcomed! TIA

I've been working through the Cambridge LR Flaw pkg and I've noticed that a good amount of the correct AC are E. Now before anyone jumps, I wouldn't go as far as to say choose E when in doubt on the question type. There are 284 questions in the pkg and E has been the correct AC enough for me to notice. Pretty useless info here but if I remember I'll give an exact number when I'm done. I believe the questions are from PT 1-38. I wonder if they say something like, "we'll go with E for flaws, C for MSS, A for MBT..." when determining which letter to select for the AC?? Again, this is pretty useless info and why did I hone in on it anyway?? Leave it up to me to be extra! LOL :)

Hey, guys! I'm giving it a go in September and I was wondering if anyone noticed any changes in any of the sections yesterday? Anyone feel there were any subtle or blatant changes in anything? From what I'm reading there were no crazy games this time. Maybe they'll lay off on the foolishness for a while?? I read that RC was insane. Any commentary there? How were the passages different? Was it just the subject matter making it hard to stick to reading for structure? Any commentary is welcomed. Good luck, guys! Now is the time to sit back with some frozen margaritas and chillax!

Hey, guys! I'm having trouble understanding why B is incorrect. My reasoning for selecting B was that if the diseased male grouse were treated with antibiotics their sacs would show that they were infected and this strengthened the hypothesis because the females would see this on their sacs and would not select them because they were unhealthy. It looks like I've made some assumptions somewhere or am I even on the right path with my logic? I read two explanations that aren't close to mine.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-4-question-06/

So I was chatting with this guy on a dating site... yeah this is really not LSAT related! lol I mentioned that I'm super cautious because some guys are only looking for sex. The guy got offended and stated that I shouldn't generalize because I didn't have numbers to prove that what I said was true. I told him that he was correct and I explained to him that for "some" there only needed to be one guy on the site that was only looking for sex so I was sure my statement was ok. He blocked me. Thanks 7 Sage!! Lmao

Hello, guys. Need help on this one please. I’ve gotten myself all turned around on this one. E was a contender but I went with D because I saw the question as an argument by analogy. According to the webinar we should introduce an area of key dissimilarity between the two phenomena so I went with D. Am I wrong that D is even introducing a key dissimilarity? E seemed super obvious but I still chose D because of the aforementioned. Also, the explanations I’ve read say that the author is saying there was trade between Europe and East Asia. I didn’t see it that way. I thought the author was just saying just because there’s no written record that doesn’t prove there was no trade. I guess I can’t really understand this one as well because the explanations all say the AC strengthen the author’s conclusion that there was trade between the two.

Hey, guys! LG is my best section but I rely a lot on brute force. Do you guys think it's more beneficial to time myself doing an entire LG section, or doing one game at a time? I think doing one game at a time encourages brute forcing for me because I know I have 8 mins for each game. Each game doesn't necessarily take 8 mins and some may take 11 mins. I always try to split boards and make inferences during BR but I panic and move on after my initial board when doing a PT and end up drawing many boards along the way and brute forcing. What do you guys think? I normally finish with ~ 1 min left but I'm still not - 0.

Hey, guys! I have a dilemma. Would you take a full ride to a lower ranked school and try to transfer later? I know transfers aren't guaranteed and everything else that comes with the uncertainty of transfers. My thinking is that I won't be taking out any loans so what could it hurt? That's just my thinking but let me know if you guys see any problems with it. Once I transfer to the school of my choice I know I'd be taking out loans so if the transfer is successful that's one year I don't have to pay for. Is it crazy though to ditch the full ride for loans?? I have around $20K loans from undergrad and I'd be looking at about another $40K if the transfer is successful. The school gives plenty of scholarships but I'm not thinking I'd get anything more that maybe $5K if that. I am iffy about staying at the lower ranked school if a transfer is unsuccessful but it wouldn't be detrimental if I did. The lower ranked school doesn't have the best rep but I personally know lawyers from the school that are doing fine. Like most times, I've heard the horror stories and I've heard the success stories about the school and the graduates so I take that with a grain of salt. The first-time bar passage rate at my school of choice is significantly higher than the lower ranked school but there's not a huge difference between the employment rates for the schools. Idk where I want to focus so I can't use that to determine which school has the better program for me. I don't plan on relocating so the weight of the school in a new state or the likes is irrelevant in determining which school is best. What would you guys do?

Hey, y'all! I'm having a tough time negating some AC for NA. For AC A and B they don't seem to be negated the same.

A. None of the mercury introduced into the body can be eliminated.

Negated: some of the mercury introduced into the body can be eliminated.

B. Some people in Beethoven's time did not ingest mercury.

Negated: all people in Beethoven's time ingested mercury.

Why was there no "not" included in A but "not" was removed from B when negated? I know you can add the phrase, "it is not the case" before the AC instead of trying to negate certain words but that doesn't work for me. For some reason it doesn't make sense to me.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-3-question-16/

Hey, guys! Can you help me make sense of my reasoning for selecting this answer choice, if that makes sense?! Lol

Ok so I chose D but I get why B is correct. I still don't know for certain that I wouldn't have the same thoughts that lead me to choose D, if presented again.

D) draws conclusion about a specific belief (more ppl believe elected officials should resign if indicted than believe that they should resign if convicted. I -> R and C - > R) based on responses to inquiries (I -> R and R - > C) about two diff specific beliefs. So basically, I said the conclusion was based on I - R and C - > R and not based on I -> R and R - > C. I said this equaled two different specific beliefs.

Does this make sense to anyone?? Or, am I just doing too much? Was I just totally off here? Hopefully I wrote this up correctly and you guys understand what I mean here. TIA

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-22-section-2-question-25/