Hi, this is an amazing tool.

Quick questions:

Can you "randomize" the questions order? I wanted to create a drill set for all "flaw" questions from PT 1-35, but instead of the PT order, can I have them random?

Can I customize the timing/clock on the the customized problem sets? I'd like to time it based the JY's LG timing recommendations. Also, for LR or RC, can I just keep track of the time spent on the passage/questions without having a "limit"?

BTW I tested an LG and it's amazing to know how long I spent on each question. We must shower 7sage with all the Kudos.

I mean the explanations videos are actually all done digitally. So..

What I've been doing lately is taking my sweet time going through LR section.

I take old LR sections and run through it once just reading the stimulus and doing a prephrase.

Then I go through the section again answering the questions using just the information from my prephrase.

Finally, I run through the section again. If I get anything wrong or thought the question was really tough, I'd watch JY's explanation and read over some free explanations on other sites.

So I run through one untimed section 3 times.

The best analogy I can think of is when a car racer doing countless untimed laps around a race course just to slowly learn all the ins and outs. They only get up to speed once they start approaching race day.

Bah, I took the bait and made E my answer. I thought that perhaps the assumption is that art or the ability to do paintings and engraving of warfare developed along with agriculture.

Maybe only when developed agriculture, did they find the inks or made the stylus or whatever needed to do the art.

But no, it just took too many jumps outside of the stimulus to do this.

Wow, this is one of those times when outside knowledge truly helps.

I taught was studying to become a science teacher and recall clearly the lessons on nematodes, embryonic development and drosophila fruit flies.

Now if I can say the same about the art and legal passages...

Congrats! That's about my goal score and I'm chipping away with 7sage help!

LG question: I feel and see tangible improvements in LR. I grasp conclusions better and eliminate trap answers faster. I can feel my thinking processes change.

For LG however, how do you KNOW you've made improvements? IS there a mental checklist or process that gets faster or more accurate? For new games, I still freeze up after initial set up when I can't make any of the key inferences.

How do you think you've improved on this and how did you go about eliciting this type of improvement on inferential skills?

Thanks!

All Jedi use the force. But if you use the force, you could also be a Sith. If All force-users on the dark-side are powerful. This statement doesn't preclude a powerful force-user who is on the light-side.

Something like that

I kind of like the panel of guests they had of different lawyers telling us what lawyers actually do.

I got some fee waivers, some new contacts and a helluva sore heel, but it was worth it.

The funny part was that the official LSAC test writer was trashing prep companies. He's said, all the answer choices are completely random so don't look for traps.

As if a magician will reveal all of his tricks.

Also, most law schools I spoke to didn't really care about GPA nearly as much as LSAT. If you just ask, "nod your head if my score of 165 would be an admit for your school?" You will get a hint at it even if no admin personnel will make an outright statement.

35 with 2 silly boys at home. The toughest part for me is definitely the feeling of making progress. Then, a child gets sick or some long hours at work make it seem like I'm slipping back.

I guess for me, studying the LSAT is like a rising tide. It may take wave after wave of some progress and some recession. But eventually, I'll hit that high water mark and FLOOD THE BANK WITH MY LOGICS!!

That or a 170.

Just got here, smaller than I thought. I'm the guy carrying his LSAT books in the biggest backpack in the ballroom.

I have a quizlet premium account. I can paste a screenshot into one side of the "flashcard" and then write all of my explanations on the otherside.

The only thing is you can't do custom sorts like you can in an excel. But I hate large blocks of text in excel and don't see a value in sorting so there you have it.

I'll be there Saturday! I'm feeling like 7sage needs a fanshop, hats, t-shirts with some famous JY quips printed on them, mugs with your goal score on it, and pictures frames to hold photos of loved whom you haven't seen since starting the LSAT journey.

Just some ideas, let's talk!

This question was ahead of its time...really portends the Green New Deal crowd of 2019.

I read the amicus brief, NOT the actual legal document, also statements and tweets and listened to a podcast that covered this.

It seem to be really vague when exactly we'll see a change, if any. At this point, everyone should just get back to foolproofing!!

There will be changes.

However it will be at LEAST 4 years before LSAC must complete RESEARCH into a POSSIBLE new AR assessment.

So with testing and rollout,

LG will not be going away for the foreseeable future.

But i was quote shocked when I first caught wind of this.

There's just a gap where not exercising a right to vote is the same thing as neglect. Not picking a candidate because they both suck is not the same as "neglecting" to vote.

Plus, AC-E's "other society" comes from the stimulus where the example of petty theft was mentioned along the lines of an organized society. So not voting damages democracies and stealing damages organized societies.

I can also argue that when AC-E says that it's a smaller jump from socially damaging in the stimulus to destructive in the AC than the one made to stand up AC-A.

The problem is that AC-A is a prescriptive ought/should statement and the stimulus is strictly descriptive. There's a assumption that people should act or vote, to avoid the bad social consequences.

Lastly, the example of voting and theft are just reasons why one must consider the broader social impact when doing an act or omitting some other act.

Answer A is not stated in the stimulus, must be inferred by making 2 key assumptions.

Answer E is a paraphrase of a principal that was applied to two examples in the stimulus. It doesn't have to be inferred via any assumptions.

I don't know, this is a very very iffy question.

#help

I have PowerScore books, LSAT Trainer, tried LSAT Demon, tried LSAT Labs and Loophole Book.

In all honesty, I appreciate JY's video explanations way more than any written explanation. Sometimes he can be vague, sometimes he misses things or makes errors. But in general, it's the way he thinks, his attitudes towards the crappy arguments and even crappier answer choices are what the real value is.

You have a rare insight into how a top scorer carves up a question, an argument, diagram a rule.

That alone, is worth the price of admission.

The only other interface that I kind of like is LSATLab. But their core lessons and explanations are not even close to the compendious work of JY.

So if you want to make your own "LSATDemon" like app, I got Quizlet. Then I make flashcards out of the questions and type my own answers and explanations. On tough ones, I paste in particular explanations that helped me understand the question. So then for $10 or $15 a year, you can reproduce the basic functionality of the LSATDemon. It just takes a little bit of work creating those flashcards.

Here's the one I'm working on for PT1-35 strengthen questions. https://quizlet.com/_6tgy09

Password is 7sage

Yes, bringing your own pencil is allowed.

I'm thinking that just eschewing the stylus and use pencil and fingers for the test.

Ideally, your intuition is good enough on the non-curve-breaker questions that you don't need to diagram. The easier SA questions will have a glaring gap in reasoning.

For SA you look for the exact wording of the ideas you want to link together. You can also look for contrapositives. I find SA questions a bit easier because the burden of the AC to move the argument to 100% validity.

PSA questions are quite different. The ideas that link together are not necessarily exact matches. It's quite a big looser in terms of validity.

Often with these, you are looking for reasoning errors and the common correct AC types for each:

Causal reasoning: look to help argument become more than coincidence. defend against alternate causes, etc.

Comparisons: look for AC's the make the comparison in the argument more applicable and likely to hold water.

Most of all, these questions are often just obvious leaps over gaps.

Such as: Barry stole our company secrets, PAY HIM!

Well, obviously it's missing a premise that link these ideas together. Perhaps Barry was contracted to conduct Penetration Testing and our company always pay our dues.

You get the idea.

Awesome!

I'm looking at the same schools, what are your stats if you care to share?

#help

Forgive me if this is obvious. However, for Flaw or Descriptive Weakening questions, we do not accept the premises as true in the stimulus?

Here, I saw the "weirdness" of linking survival to belief. However, I hesitating in saying this was the flaw because I'm in the accept the premises but only attack the "support" mode.

So I assumed if the author states this as a premise, then I must accept it.

That's why I picked B. Not that B is a great AC but more that I didn't think A was correct. I thought A contradicts the premise and we're not to do that.

So is it safe to say that Flaw and Weaken questions are different in this regard?

For Weaken - assume the stimulus true and use AC's that, if true, would destroy the reasoning of the stimulus.

For Flaw - assume nothing, all weak parts of the stimulus are fair game for criticism?

Yay!

#HELP

I really think this is categorized as an MSS is because of the tiny assumption between stimulus and AC-B.

Stimulus has premise: The best strategy is to renovate train station.

----------------

AC-B has: Outerville SHOULD renovate train station.

Missing premise (assumption) is that if it's the best strategy for Outerville, they should do it..

I really think this was written as a MBT/MP question but downgraded to MSS because AC-B cannot reach the 100% validity required for MBT/MP question.

So instead of rewriting the stimulus, they just turned down the question stem from MBT into a MSS.