i'm the opposite; 3.7ish GPA and regularly PTing between 177 and 179 (average has been a 177). is there any way i have a chance at some T14s? the only reason my gpa is a 3.7 is because i had a faulty freshman year due to an issue in my personal life (which was documented) and after freshman year i got it together and since first sem sophomore year i've been earning straight 4.0s in every single course i've taken. can i reasonably expect to get into at least one T14, all else constant?

rutgers students cannot relate rip

maybe i'm just dumb and maybe it's just bc i go to a big city university but i genuinely cannot fathom who else would be giving out parking citations on a campus besides police lmao

getting all of these right bc i minored in philosophy for the express purpose of getting acquainted with formal logic so as to do well on the LSAT. this is the most cathartic payoff experience of my life

for anyone confused about the formal logic- i personally find the formal logic lessons outlined in the PowerScore Bibles to be much more helpful than this. J.Y. is not the best at explaining things in this respect IMO- the "buckets" reasoning isn't very helpful especially for people who don't learn by visualizing. PowerScore uses a more traditional way of teaching formal logic- literally just memorizing several universal logical rules and then applying them to the different problems- and once you memorize it is much easier than this.

they could, but the argument never assumes that they couldn't. it's descriptively inaccurate; the argument never claims that eliminating dairy is the only way to lessen the risk of heart disease, just that it's one probable way

"we should both take some time to cool off" great, now 7sage is breaking up with me

got this one right but genuinely think it should be rated harder than a 3/5

#feedback #feedback i'm not seeing the example question about "learning the lessons of history", like it's not anywhere on this page but the lesson is referencing it

correct answer: shows up

me: ahhh...here is the correct answer

J.Y.: ookayyy.....

me: maybe not? proceeds to religiously second-guess

J.Y.: at minimum you should pay attention to this answer....but that doesn't make it right

me: accepting the fact that i will never be a lawyer

J.Y.: however.....it is right :)

me: ....

did a little dance after getting this one right fr

never thought i'd see such wisdom from Charles Entertainment Cheese

yayyyyy :3

it's bc of the contrapositive. you have to take "only if" into the context of being a contrapositive statement; it's not always right or wrong just because of the words itself

basically the original argument is creating the idea that the reason that dioxin cannot be causing the problems in the fish is because when the mill gets shut down the fish recover from their problems even though the dioxin stays in the environment since it breaks down slowly. they emphasize that it breaks down slowly because they're trying to create the impression that while the dioxin still stays in the environment, the fish recover from the problems, so the dioxin isn't causing those problems. choice C implies that actually the dioxin doesn't stay in the environment since river currents carry it away quickly, so the fact that the fish are recovering doesn't prove anything

replying bc i love your username lol. this might be late but C is incorrect since it mixes up sufficiency with necessity. our formula for finding the rule involves placing the premises in the sufficient place ("if premises"...) and the conclusion in the necessary space ("then conclusion..."). this answer places a premise in the necessary place (using "only if", a necessary indicator).

so proud of myself for getting this one right lol #feedback

not from NYC but interested in studying virtually; first PT score was 169 (aiming for 172+)

Since it's basically a MSS question it requires inference and inferring specifically which statement receives the most support, not only using what is explicitly said. I think you're meant to infer that "I object to teaching this to children" and "it diverts attention from things which are more valuable" imply "this should not be taught"

i got this one wrong (chose D) and this is the first time I've gotten a practice question wrong ever on 7Sage. I disagree with this one. In no way does "diverse cultures" imply "all cultures". The stimulus could have been talking only about ten different cultures which would constitute "diverse" but not "all". Sorry but this one wasn't fair. You can't expect students to meticulously catch on to words like "all" and then just decide whenever you want to that "all" is no longer as important.

PowerScore Bibles give a better idea of how to interpret conditional indicators. i use their methods (which i've already memorized; they're much simpler than the 7sage ones) and then just use 7sage for practice. if you still have a little while until you take the test then i would recommend that

PTs to improve timing. timing is something that can always be improved upon, and the fact that test day always comes with additional anxiety is something that affects timing. as a philosophy minor i'm obviously already experienced in LR (still working on practicing RC) and my main goal over the next 2 months is just to practice so much that it comes almost naturally since speed is my main issue

i haven't completed the next modules yet but i'm minoring in philosophy so i have past experience with both kinds of logic. causation is not absolute and airtight like formal logic is. an airtight formal logic sentence would be something like "if A does not happen, B will happen. A did not happen. Therefore, B will happen". causational logic, even in its strongest form, would probably fall more along the lines of something like "A happened right before B, and when A did not happen B did not happen. therefore A caused B". even though it is extremely likely that causation happened, it cannot be proven for sure beyond a doubt. formal logic is absolutely without any doubt or question whatsoever, causational always has gaps etc