Hi there! I was just curious to see why on some videos using faster playback speeds severely distorted JY's voice? It seems that instead of the video playing at a faster speed, something happens to the audio quality instead.

I've been biting my tongue on this one but it bothers me that I can't figure out why this is happening. I'm not switching between devices (iOS, Windows, etc. usually studying on my laptop)... and just have it open using IE. It comes up frequently enough where trying to playback at 1.4x means I can't really understand what he's saying because of this distortion. Other times, however, the effect seems to be less dramatic. For example, he sounds like mickey mouse when you 1.4x him in the flammable creosote weaken question video. He's still perfectly understandable here.

After looking at this question for quite a while, this question still does not click with me.

I am not too sure how answer choice C can effectively close the gap.

Thank you so much for your help!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-4-question-21/

Anyone interested in doing daily RC practice in a group setting (skype/online)? I am looking to work together with someone who is good on RC so I can learn and hopefully improve on it. I am a first time test taker, aiming for June 2017 test date. I have been studying for a while and really struggling with RC (timing, remembering details and tackling questions is something I am struggling with). I am doing well on LR and would be willing to do some sessions for LR too.

.

Hey All,

I just registered for the June LSAT and the ONLY test center that is within a reasonable distance is the SUNY New Paltz test center. I had gone on to register a couple weeks ago when there were available spots, but realized I needed a picture to register. I recently took the picture and registered this morning, only to find out it had filled up. I requested to be on the waiting list, but I'm wondering how likely it will be for me to get a spot? As of now, my PrepTest morning routine does not include an hour and a half drive, so if that is what is likely going to happen, I guess I would prefer to know now then a week before the test. Considering it's not even March yet, I want to believe I have a good change of getting a spot, but I'm sure those who have already done this before know better than I do. Thoughts?

Thank you.

Hi all,

I am quite puzzled by the answer to this question altogether. The answer to this is answer choice A (circular reasoning of the first sentence and the last part of the last sentence following "because"), but I am not quite sure why this is circular reasoning. When I saw this question and when I stumbled across answer choice A, I eliminated this by:

seeing the premises as the first sentence and the part of the last sentence that followed "because" which both state "in order to succeed in today's society, one must have a college degree," while seeing the conclusion as "the skeptics objection of counterexamples are only apparent success (the conclusion indicator of however pointed to this)." Thus, the premise and conclusion were different.

even if we were to see the first sentence and the last part of the last sentence to be the conclusion and premise, this wouldn't be circular as the first sentence is a general statement of succeeding in today's society, whereas the last sentence discussed the concepts of : 1. "true" success (a matter of degree in the success), and 2. why a college degree was important (because it showed that a person did not have enough "education").

Again, even if we were to see the first sentence and last part of the last sentence to be the conclusion and premise (and assume that they are stating the same thing), it is not circular reasoning if you provide additional premises. It took me a while to find the 7sage lecture on this but here it is https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-2-question-09/ (see from the 2:20 mark).

So the structure would be like this:

Conclusion: In order to succeed in today's society one must have a college degree

Major Premise: The skeptics version of success is only apparent

Premise: without a college degree a person does not have enough education to be truly successful

The addition of the major premise would, according to J.Y., sidestep this from circular reasoning.

Any take on these three understandings of this question? Any help would be great!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-3-question-20/

Hello fellow 7Sagers!

This is a question for all those of you going through the application cycle right now, or who have already gone through it.

How do you go about negotiating scholarships?

So far I have gotten accepted into a couple of schools. One particular school I am looking at attending, got my acceptance about a month ago, but no offer of scholarships so far. Another school accepted me a couple of weeks ago, is about in the same ranking and offered me a scholarship (merit-based).

Now my question is, should I wait to see what the other school (the one I'd like to attend) will offer me based on need-based scholarship? Or should I give them a call, let them know that I really want to attend their school but that this other school has offered me x amount of dollars in merit-based scholarship money and that I wanted to see if they could match it since scholarship money is really important to me?

I know deposits are due mid-April and I'll have to make a choice sooner than later, but I'm just not exactly sure how to go about this whole scholarship conversation.

Thank you for reading and any input you have! :)

I'm fanatically refreshing my email every 15 minutes now that we have hit 4:30 EST. It doesn't look like it's today, sadly. Commiserate with me, fellow February testers!

Hi all,

I have a question on answer choice C.

I understand the flaw of the survey: how it fails to distinguish the residents who dropped out in its own schools and those who dropped out of schools from somewhere else. But, after contemplating the answer choices, I am reluctant to accept answer choice C as the correct answer (the part where it says: those who had received their schooling elsewhere).

To my understanding, if you "received your schooling elsewhere," this meant that you did NOT dropout. To "receive something" would be to finish in the transaction of getting that something. So, answer choice C would be pointing out a flaw of distinguishing that was incorrect. If the answer choice had said having "attended (which opens up the possibility of dropping out" instead of "received," then I would have no problem with the answer choice.

Any take on this? If my understanding of "received schooling" is incorrect, any explanation (or examples that can show the usage of the word/phrase) would be great!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-1-question-15/

Hi all,

I know that LSAC says to take PT under true timed conditions, which includes a 5th (experimental) section. However JY mentioned in the core curriculum that he didn't think the difference between taking a 4 and a 5 section PT was that big, because on the actual day adrenaline will keep us going.

Sometimes I am short on time and just do a 4 section PT. Am I doing myself a massive disservice? Thoughts?

"Having an efficient, attractive subway system makes good economic sense."

EAS = efficient, attractive subway system

GES = Good economic sense

I interpret this sentence as EAS being a subset of GES. Therefore, EAS --> GES.

However, as with any sentence lacking universal indicators, there is lots of ambiguity here. But I'm not sure that squashes the conditionality. Nevertheless, in the video explanation below, JY illustrates this sentence as "GES (eas)".

I would love any input on this specific instance as well as guidance for interpreting conditionality without indicators in general. As well as the difference between "EAS --> GES" and "GES (eas)". Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/attractive-subway-system-sa-question/#comment-56183

I had a hard time understanding why (A) is the right answer. After thinking about it for a day on and off, I came up with this reasoning. Please take a look if my logic behind getting the right answer is correct.

I wonder if this this question can be viewed as Resolve Reconcile type; the premise says the land-dwelling whales needed hind limbs capable of supporting its weight, and conclusion says the fragile limbs of whale found in the fossil is the remnant of whale once lived on land. But I tried to solve it as strengthen question.

This question talks about whales from three different periods; ancient whale (lived before fossilized whale skeleton), fossilized whale, and modern whale.

Premise:

Conclusion: The fragile hind limbs are remnants of limbs that land-dwelling whale once had.

I initially misunderstood the conclusion as the fragile hind limbs found in the fossil is the remains the whale that was living on land. So land-dwelling whale having fragile limbs is contradiction within the premise... but the correct understanding is the fragile hind limbs newly found in fossil is how the ancient whale evolved to be. The key was a correct understanding of the word "remnant."

So, to summarize it... whale evolution is like this chronologically.

Ancient Whale (ones lived before the newly found fossilized skeleton)

Fossilized Whale

Modern Whale

So, we need to strengthen the conclusion that the fossilized whale skeleton that has fragile limbs is the evolved form of whales limbs that lived on land at one point.

(A) is correct. The confirmation that ancient whale had a full pelvis would strengthen that by evolution it became a partial pelvis (as found in fossil) and now only bare remnant of pelvis.

(B) This weakens the conclusion

(C) irrelevant

(D) I initially chose this answer and that was because I misunderstood what the conclusion meant precisely.

(E) irrelevant.

It became a quite long explanation... I wonder if I am overthinking when it is really a simple question. I would appreciate any confirmation or correction on my reasoning. Thanks!!

So I for one am a hyper person when it comes to tests in general. I don't know why, but that mysterious 6th gear always shows up regardless of how prepared I am for the test. I'm making my way through the CC for a second time and I have been trying to knock down one of my biggest problems: my inner clock.

Sometimes it feels like 1 and half minutes have passed on a single problem when in reality it has only been 30 seconds. This would cause me to proceed too quickly, causing me to misread and make bad mistakes (this especially hurts on easy layup questions). I found my remedy to be quite simple.

When I time myself during the problem sets, I have started to make written notes to myself, writing down my time and take notice of how my results relate to it. If I catch in the BR that I made a rush mistake by reading too fast, I make sure to notice the clock as I'm doing the next few questions. I have found that trying to show that time isn't going as quickly as I think has helped me immensely with concentrating and gathering all the necessary details, which has lead to my accuracy going up dramatically. You don't have to do this for every question. But doing one problem set for example, and taking a few glances at the clock while doing the problem can increase your awareness and help reset your inner clock.

I know I'm not the only one out there struggling with this.....and I still do currently. But I have much more control of my inner clock and realize a ton of my mistakes have come from this single issue. I hope this helps those out there struggling with this. Don't look at the clock as the enemy, but as your friend!

Feel like this after an LG game or RC passage???

https://media.giphy.com/media/lfdQ6KwpfZUC4/giphy.gif

Join us Wednesday night - the BR call will focus on RC & LG. The Saturday Study Group session will cover LR PT65. So many people asked Vanessa and me for this type of BR call so here it is!! Participation & Feedback will determine if we continue to offer this type of BR call:)

We will review individual RC passages and have the white board app to work through specific LG games. We will start with PT65 and can include PT63 & 62 if requested. Please post your RC passage/LG game requests to help prioritize what we cover on the call since they can be a time consuming process.

With the RC intensive next week provided by our Sages, Vanessa & I want to provide an opportunity to talk about specific passages and isolate weaknesses for us all to gain the most from the upcoming RC webinars!

Mark your Calendar - RC Intensive Schedule:

Sun 3/5 Webinar: Tackling Questions with Limited Passage Understanding with David (Accounts Playable)

Tues 3/7 Live Commentary: Commentary and Pacing Strategy with Josh (Can't Get Right)

Thurs 3/9 Webinar: Breaking Through Difficult Passages with Daniel (danielznelson)

The BR session will start on GoToMeeting but it has had so many glitches lately, please be prepared to switch to Discord if necessary:)

Please join the meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/806526421

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (408) 650-3123

Access Code: 806-526-421

A trick if GoToMeeting app freezes on the "Waiting for admin to start the meeting" - close the session. Use this link

https://www.gotomeeting.com/ and on the main page click "Join a Meeting" then enter the 9 digit Access Code - 806526421 to join. We will start the meeting at least 5 minutes early to determine if there are any issues

If you actually read this entire post - one of the most important things to do for this type of call is to have a clean copy of the passages & games. Please post your requests and mention that you will have a clean copy (3(/p)

Prior to my intensive two week study, I was scoring on average -5 on LR & RC and -6 on LG.

After two weeks of intensive study (question banks, review of my weaknesses etc.), I am missing -3 to -5 on LG and on RC.

That is the good news.

BUT

Bad news. I started missing -7 and once -8 on LR. :(

My overall score has dropped as a result.

WHAT IS GOING ON???

So, what I'm understanding about the practicing of the LR questions (MSS specifically) is that you just need to be a 100% sure about your answer choices. The Blind Review applies for the questions that you weren't certain of the answer in order for you to reach that 100% certainty as to why the answer choices are correct/incorrect. Furthermore, the question choices that yield subtle differences that makes you think "hmm... could be.." is definitely wrong because there's an answer choice that is definitely solid with the given premises... Right? I'm curious because I was doing the Preptest29-Section4-Question3 and realized that the answer I chose (D) was the aforementioned "hmmm.... could be..." so during my blind review, before consulting the explanation video, I re did the question and saw that (A) was the correct answer because it did not have the possibility of being countered when I plug it into the stimulus.

Idk if ppl are still looking for this but I just ran across this site on TLS. https://180pedia.com/lsat-cambridge-packet-lists/

The packets from all three sections for PT 1-38 are there. Of course you'll have to do your owning printing and/or copying pasting to get one cohesive pkg but it's better than nothing. I haven't really looked over the whole site but there seems to be explanations that link to the original post as well. 7Sage is there! I've only seen LG explanations but I just did a quick browse. There could be explanations from other sites as well for other sections. Hope this helps!

Any non-LSAT resources you've found to be useful. I'm planning to write for the Sept '17 test so I'd like to start these habits/practices now. Here are some that I've seen recommended:

Reading the Economist (while practicing Memory Method), Wireless Philosophy YouTube channel, Soduko, meditation.

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view8/20140127/4963909/you-need-to-study-your-grammar-son-o.gif

Hey everyone, I hope your LSAT studies are going spectacular!

It's no secret that English grammar is very dynamic, weird, and convoluted even for the native speaker. Besides the helpful grammar section in the 7sage curriculum, outside review should be implemented in your studies to help get awesome results in your PT/BR performance. I once read a comment from @"Cant Get Right" that really put this all in perspective for me. It was on a post about relearning grammar and he said, "Just recognizing that is a great start. The logic repeats itself over and over and over. They just don't have a lot of options on the logic. So what they do is they disguise that material with grammar. At a certain level, it really does become a test of grammar. Mastering the logic is far from sufficient to ensure a good score On the hardest questions, the difficulty is often not the logic at all, it's the grammar. So this is definitely worth a large allocation of your study time."

So please make it a point to take time outside of your prep to truly understand the logic behind grammar! For anyone interested, I've found this free online grammar course that will take place on February 27,2017:

https://www.edx.org/course/english-grammar-style-uqx-write101x-3

Let's do dis!

Hi all,

Was drilling LR and noticed one of the areas I want to improve on is "formal logic", i.e. Translating into lawgic type questions. I noticed this types of questions most often appear in Must be True, SA and PSA question types. 2 questions:

Am I missing any question types where formal logic predominantly appears?

Is there a way I can practice only these types of questions? (Like a question bank of something or the sort)

I looked at the 7sage question bank and didn't see anything specifically for formal logic, as it's not a question type. Any advice would be helpful. Thanks in advance.

I'm making my trek back into LG and while watching JY's LG Fool Proof Method, he says to get the clean copies and all and to focus on making inferences which I totally understand. But he makes no mention of the questions. Should I include those as well or just focus on the inferences?

So I'm not really sure what kind of law or what kind of firm I'd like to practice yet. However, In House Council has perked my interest a bit.

I've read that many of times, people have obtained these positions by working for a while in big law firms. I'm curious if anyone has heard/read about graduates obtaining in house positions or a lower level version out of school? I'm not completely sold on doing big law but I'm definitely not against it either. Just curious what y'all have heard or seen.

Alright, I've done this webinar several times before and now it's time to see if I can do it while remaining within a reasonable amount of time! It's a big topic with a lot of information, but I'm cautiously optimistic!

https://media.giphy.com/media/GHbFNkyhu9ByU/giphy.gif

We'll talk about how to determine where you are in your prep, and how to let your level of ability guide your efforts in order to get the most out of each PT and to progress efficiently and effectively towards your target score and beyond. Trying to study once you finish the curriculum can be really overwhelming. By the end of my prep, I had it down to a science. But I had to learn the hard way through trial and much error. But you don't! So I hope to see y'all there!

Post Curriculum Study Strategies with Sage Josh

Mon, Feb 27, 2017 8:00 PM EST

&

Tue, Feb 28, 2017 8:00 PM EST

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/518004749

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (669) 224-3212

Access Code: 518-004-749

First GoToMeeting? Try a test session: http://help.citrix.com/getready

This is my biggest problem at the moment, and I don't recall this being in the curriculum. Could someone point this lesson out if I'm missing it? Seems like a pretty big part of the test.

As I have posted before, I was accepted into the University Chicago but it doesn't look like I'm going to have much help financially. However, I have received full ride offers from Chicago Kent, Michigan State, DePaul, and Indiana McKinney. I have also gotten into a couple of top 25 schools but I am facing a similar dilemma. My ultimate goal is to get into big law and I have been told that if I graduate in the top 5% at a tier 2 school then that shouldn't be a problem. Curves matter to me too and I also want to take that into consideration when choosing a school