- Joined
- Jul 2025
- Subscription
- Core
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
I'm biased because I'm a big anti-AI individual, but from an objective standpoint, I wouldn't rely on AI questions. This was what happened when I used to use AI about a year ago (maybe it's better now?): I would give AI the question and the answer choices, word for word. Then it would give me an answer and the explanation as to why it's right, but that wasn't even the right answer... I would tell them that it's not the right answer, and then they'll give me another reason why another AC is correct, and then that also wasn't the right answer. So... yeah, take this with a grain of salt lol, hope this helps and good luck.
Also, since you've gone through all of the LSAT, I'm sure there are some that you don't remember that well, and you'll be able to retake those and ensure that you get them correct, meaning you solidified your understanding of that question and question type.
@EmmaHulbert Hey, I know it's been a while since you asked this, and I hope you found the answer, but it's not "only" it's "THE only" which is a sufficient indicator!
@yesterdayseeker mann i hate when that happens and you're stuck between two answers. just wanted to say that answers A and B are saying the same thing and so E would have been the only one left! i'm sure you'll crush the upcoming questions :)
Any advice on those who are currently working and are on a different career path? Thanks!
@BillyNotReally I felt the exact same way, like omg of course B was the correct answer. Notice why you chose the wrong AC as well, and then write it down in your wrong answer journal alongside why the right answer is correct. Note any common traps or tendencies you are doing, Then the next time you do any drills or questions, look over your wrong answer journal to avoid making the same mistakes. Hope this helps!
Hey! Sorry this isn't working out for you, but knowing why the other answers might be correct will help you figure out why the other answer choices are wrong or could be correct for another question type. This will allow you to make your mind malleable ergo, making you think more analytically!
@ThomasMunnia What I tend to do is ask myself, "why" when I find a conclusion.
Why should the bill be enacted? Because there's toxic levels in fish. Because continuing to permit fishing in Eagle Bay could thus have grave effects on public health.
Yeah, that's why the bill should be enacted. That makes sense!
Why should continuing to permit fishing in Eagle Bay have grave effects on public health? Because there's toxic levels in fish. Because the bill should be enacted.
Now, that ain't right...
There will be trickier stimuluses than this one with convoluted language and full of referential wording, but it's just practicing. There's also early modules in the core curriculum that talks about this. That's my two cents. I hope this helps!
@joegav1 Ooh thanks, I'll look into that class. Yeah, if my brain is hurting, it means it's working
@JCSamson11 Thank you!! I'm sure you'll soon get all of them right, and then the NA questions will fear you :D
@PeytonMiller Hi, thanks for replying! Yes, I do pick out the conclusion confidently. I think you're right that I'm struggling to find the comparison (if the negated sentence makes the conclusion impossible, has no impact, or strengthens). I think I get tripped up because sometimes the negation feels like it has no impact, but maybe I'm not thinking hard enough TT
Hi all,
I just finished the NA module and am doing some drills but it's going horribly. I know these questions are really difficult, but I just can't seem to get a grasp on it.
I know that these questions depend on your making your own assumptions based on the information given, but it's annoying when the explanations make it seem like you're supposed to get that one specific assumption. I guess I'm frustrated because you can come up with so many assumptions, but the right one is like the 3rd one you came up with and it's said in a very convoluted way in the answer choice, and on top of that, you also have to do the negation test, which for me is also a bit confusing...
It's making me feel like I'm not good at making assumptions and then also the negation test frustrates me as well because it wants me to negate (which I am good at, all my negations match up) but I can't seem to figure its relationship with the argument...
I don't really know what the point of this post was, maybe partially to rant, but I think I just would like your guys' input on what you did to overcome the difficulty, frustration and feeling like nothing in the NA makes sense because I feel like I'm about to start tearing out hairs..
@Susie Also, if you want to enhance your WAJ, you can also write why you chose the wrong AC, and so when you look back at your journal before studying, you can actively try to avoid the same mistakes you made before -- just putting in my two cents!
@Sunday_Blues13 OMG SAME, 4 seconds over,-- I had my jaw on the floor and took a picture
@JackFoley No, this was mainly to break it down for you, to see the foundation. I feel as though this is still important as in the future, if I'm stuck or doing a BR at a PAI question, I think this would be a good way to break it down. Hope this helps and good luck!
@goodluckonthelsatguys I don't think you should be reading the answer choices first -- forgive me if I missed it, but we weren't told to do that (the only thing I can think you're referring to was last lesson where JY looked at the AC first, but that was just to prove a point)
It's usually stimulus or question stem first, and then AC.
@Mikeorona619 Yeah haha, honestly, that's so true. But I think what we need to get from this is if we stumble across a LR and it is in an experimentation setting, we can think about these examples here!
For instance if we come across a weaken problem, there might be an answer choice that basically boils down to 'the participants are actually affected by the placebo effect' or something like that.
Hope this helps and good luck!
@QarimatOgunneye
I think one of the primary reasons that this section uses A B and C is so they can do less hand holding. So instead of them actually writing out like you did, they just substitute it for letters.
That being said, you're Lawgic is right! So is the one listed in this section!
If we translate their Lawgic to your Lawgic, and let's use NEG, for "not exceptionally good" to substitute 'C' (since EG is exceptionally good in your Lawgic):
Their Lawgic becomes this:
NYP -> PV -m-> NEG
NYP <-s-> NEG
If we want to negate your /EG and their 'C', which is NEG, we get:
Yours:
/EG -> EG
which is exceptionally good
Theirs:
NEG -> /NEG
which is not not exceptionally good,
but the 'not's cancel out! which means;
which is exceptionally good
So it's the same! You got your Lawgic right! I think they're going simple with the letters to make us just understand the basic flaws.
Hope this helps, and good luck studying!
For question 4, if you change
"A pet adoption center with at least ten years of continuous operations will be supported by the Mittens Foundation if it shelters more than fifty animals."
to
"A pet adoption center with at least ten years of continuous operations will be supported by the Mittens Foundation unless it shelters more than fifty animals."
would the answer be different (or I guess opposite)?
The reason why I'm asking is I don't know if I'm understanding after reading the explanation because I have the explanation, or if I am truly understanding it...
@JeremyK Hi! I don't know how useful this is anymore, but D states:
I choose 'do not understand their musical roots', negate it and put it as the sufficient:
Understand musical roots -> good show
OR
I choose 'treated to a good show', negate it, and put it as the sufficient
good show -> understand musical roots
Either way, because the argument states
inspired musical performances -> good show -> sophisticated listener -> musical roots
(i negated the good show because of the unless and put that in the sufficient)
OR the contrapositive:
musical roots -> sophisticated listener -> good show -> inspired musical performance
AC D and the linked conditionals don't match, and so it isn't D. It seems like you just swapped the sufficient and necessary, but I hope this answer helps you out! Good luck!
@x2027 The thing about a group 3 and a group 4 indicator in the same conditional statement is that they cancel each other out. So whenever I see a group 3 and 4 indicator in a sentence, I love it because I can just remove the indicators and read it as it is.
So for this, you get: subject to licensing requirement -> threat to human health
Hope this helps, and good luck studying!