Ramadan Mubarak to my fellow Muslim 7sagers! Perfect time to recharge our faith and get more LSAT prep in without having to worry about eating/drinking throughout the day :D

Hi could someone help me out with the diagramming on this one? I found it absolutely confounding and I'm usually pretty decent at conditional phrasing.

So what I took away from this after looking at this thoroughly was that the original logic chain is something to the effect of:

P1: EW (Weak Economy) -> PRC (Prices Remain Constant) and UR (Unemployment Rises)

P2: UR -> ID (Investment Decreases)

P3: /ID

What I got from this was: EW-> PRC

-> UR -> ID

Arrow in the second line after the blank is supposed to symbolize the "and." (And is split after, Or is split before)

From there: /ID ->/UR ->/EW

PRC seems irrelevant now since you've already failed part of the "and". Sufficient (EW) is already failed by /UR, therefore PRC floats. It can do whatever.

How do we get from /ID ->/UR ->/EW

to /EW -> ID must be false

Not sure how this is correct. Obviously, since we know ID is stated in the stimulus, this must be true. Then it says EW, which we know not to be true.

Similarly, with D, we know that the economy is not weak, must be true, but prices remaining constant, I have no idea how this figures in.

Same thing with E. Either unemployment is rising, and we know that it isn't, or the economy is not weak, which also must be true. We know both of these must be true. Still not sure how this translates into an either...or statement.

What am I missing here? Is it something to with the either...or statements?

Hey, anybody out there scoring 170 on their practice LSATs? I'm beginning my studying, and I want to make sure I kill it and do it right. How are you going about it? Do you make sure that you're only studying in absolute silence or something? Always in a library/ in your favourite chair at home? Have some sort of night ritual that helps it all sink in? My GPA is 3.9, so I think I have a real chance at bringing in a high score. Much appreciated.

Principle or PSA question?

In LR, I try to identify the question type as quickly as possible, but sometimes I cannot identify immediately. I have hard time differentiating PSA and Principle questions under timed conditions.

Typical PSA questions are like:

"Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the reasoning above?"

and I can identify it as PSA immediately.

But for example, PT57.S2.Q1. says:

"The reasoning above most closely conforms to which one of the following principles?"

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-2-question-01/

This is a fairly easy question, but I didn't know that this is a PSA question until after I read the stimulus and ACs.

Do you have any tips in differentiating PSAs from Principles quickly?

=============================================

Is Q39.S2.Q11 a PSA question?

Also, 7Sage labeled Q39.S2.Q11 as PSA, but I feel like this is a Principle question since we're given a conditional statement in the stimulus, and answers give us a premise and a conclusion.

"Which one of the following judgements most closely conforms to the principle above?"

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-39-section-2-question-11/

Is this a PSA question? If so, can someone elaborate on the difference between PSA and Principle questions?

Thank you :)

I'm adding my explanation to this question since it doesn't currently exist on 7sage. Feel free to critique my reasoning.

This is a necessary assumption question. We know this because the question stem says the argument above makes which one of the following assumptions? The correct AC must be an assumption we know the argument makes. Therefore, it is a necessary assumption.

P: R bacteria provide nitrogen to bean plants and other legumes. Nitrogen is an essential plant nutrient. Wheat must normally be supplied nitrogen by nitrogen fertilizer.

C: If technology produces wheat strains that will host R bacteria, the need for fertilizers will be reduced.

Flaw: I originally thought but what if nitrogen is not the only essential plant nutrient for plants to grow? Might the need for fertilizer remain? B plays on this erroneous understanding. This isn't the actual flaw.

A. 'should' is irrelevant. This is not about what should happen it's about what is/will happen.

B. This was temping and it the trap answer choice. The conclusion says the need for artificial fertilizers will be reduced if biotech succeeds in producing wheat strains who host R bacteria. What about other reasons growers need to add fertilizer? Can we conclude from no longer needing nitrogen that fertilizer demand in general will be reduced? Even if nitrogen only comprises a small subset of all fertilizer use, if we eliminate the nitrogen need, then yes, the fertilizer demand will be reduced. This is true even if nitrogen is not the only soil nutrient that must be supplied. The key word to not falling for this trap answer choice is "reduced." Perhaps I was temped because I was thinking "eliminated." If the conclusion said the demand would be eliminated then yes nitrogen would have to be the only reason growers use fertilizer.

C. This is not necessary. It talks about other grasses but even if it didn't, even if there are strains of wheat that do have R naturally, we know there are some that aren't. That's what the whole argument is about so this is irrelevant.

D. Similar reasoning to C. We don't need legumes to be the only crops that produce nitrogen. We know some wheats don't and we know there is an existing need for nitrogen based fertilizer. The argument is simply saying the need will go down if wheat is modified to host R bacteria.

E. This is absolutely necessary. If the R bacteria did not produce nitrogen in the wheat roots then it wouldn't reduce the need for artificial fertilizer. This is the true flaw. Just because the plant will host the bacteria doesn't mean that it will necessarily have the desired effect.

So i am planning on taking the September LSAT. I am almost done my bachelors, all i have left is a 6 week online capstone. My question is, can i apply to school without having finished my bachelors yet? I dont want to take the capstone during my LSAT prep. So i was considering taking it at some point next year but i want to be considered for early decision for fall 2018. Was wondering if schools will extend an offer when i have not completed my bachelors yet. As of right now i have 3.9 gpa and i dont think this capstone will change that. Thanks for your help!!

Happy Sunday, everyone!

I'm currently working through the Core Curriculum, and for the harder problem sets in the Logical Reasoning modules (mostly Sufficient and Pseudo-Sufficient Assumption questions sets) I'm able to eliminate 3/5 answer choices without any problem. Of the remaining two answer choices (which is always the correct answer choice and one incorrect one) I end up eliminating the correct answer choice and choosing the incorrect one, even after carefully considering both options and writing down explanations for why I eliminated or chose each AC.

Has this ever happened to any of you, and what did you do to correct it?

Thank you for all your help ~ it has been invaluable in my study prep! =)

is it Some are not A and not B?

A --> C

B --> C

/A some /B

I was trying to translate this into english and was having some trouble.

for example,

all jedi use the force. all sith use the force.

if you are not a force user, you are not Jedi and not Sith

so..

some are not Jedi and Not Sith? ( /A some /B) is that correct?

I have taken the LSAT twice (both times over a year ago) and got 170 and 172, in that order. I have a 3.95 GPA and am considering retaking a third time because I know if I can get myself above 175, I would at least put myself in the running for some good money from CCN (specifically Hamilton at Columbia, since I know they tend to have a 174/175 cutoff). But I've also heard that having 3 takes can ding your application at HYS. Any thoughts on what I should do?

Whenever I run the 7Sage page on my Mac laptop it seems to randomly heat my computer up to the point where the fans are running at full speed and the laptop is hot to the touch. At first I thought it was caused by something else, so I spent some time clearing up memory, checking browser extensions, "turn it off and back on again", etc. The problem kept occurring, but only when I was on the 7Sage website working through the lessons. If I exit 7Sage, the laptop fans slow down and the internal temperature drops back down again almost instantly.

Just wondering if anyone else out there with a Mac laptop has this happen to them on the 7Sage page, and if so, is it normal? Do you know how to get my laptop to calm down?

Thanks in advance! :)

Hi all,

I just did a full-simulated LR section and scored -5. I missed #2 so I feel like I missed a big opportunity there. I haven't finished going through the curriculum. I take the September LSAT.

What's it going to take to get that number down to -3 or better on every.single.section? Could this be a pattern recognition issue or just more practice?

I feel -3 or less is a good goal because LR and RC are nearly impossible to score perfect consistently because of the varying nature.

Im having trouble understanding why answer choice E is correct. I chose answer choice D because the conclusion has to do with the experts being useless because they offered contradictory information. I thought that when were looking at reasoning method questions were supposed to look at the conclusion and see how it is flawed. Here is my reasoning for the other ones to be incorrect:

a) This isn’t the correct answer because its not talking about the argument

b) This is also incorrect because it has nothing to do with the argument

c) Why would we consider other opinions outside of health when were talking about health related issues

d) This is correct because Ive eliminated every other answer and also because they’re assuming that just because the expert opinions are trustworthy in one case that they have to be trustworthy in all cases

e) This is incorrect because the argument doesn’t have anything to with whether or not the coffee is good for you but rather the experts are useless

TYA!!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-38-section-1-question-06/

There was a logic game that has like 12 days or something, and the rules made it so day 1 was equivalent to day 7, day 2 equal to day 8, day 3 to day 9, etc. Do you guys know which game it was?

Through the BR process, I've noticed that I can attribute 1-2 missed questions per LR section to "misreading" the stimulus. It seems that I am prone to skip an important adjective that clarifies the correct AC. Most of the time, I approach the AC's with a good understanding of the argument/facts, but for the few questions that hinge on these small clarifiers, I often get burned.

When I read the stimulus, I typically follow the end of each line with my pencil. I've noticed in JY's live commentary videos, he tracks literally every word with his pencil. Does anyone have a method of reading (specifically in terms of pencil usage) that they feel allows them to capture even small details? Do you think I would benefit from switching to this more methodical approach? Thanks in advance!

If you are having trouble with Logic, or maybe just interested in gaining a more in-depth understanding of logic then check out this book:

Introduction to Logic (2nd Edition)

by Gensler

This was one of the first text books I used in in undergrad for an Intro to Logic class. I recently came across it in a box with all my other books from undergrad and decided to give it a quick skim -- turned out to be a great refresher!

It goes way more in-depth than anyone taking the LSAT would need, but still, I think it really has helped me understand the logic that undergirds much of the test. Even reading a few chapters I think would be of great supplement to anyone from beginners to high scorers alike. No need to read the entire thing, even skimming through it would be worth it. Especially the relevant chapters!

My goal is a 168+ to get into my target law schools.

My PT score range is 164-166. I have burned PTs from 55 - 70.

Today I had the worst score (PT70) since I started studying earlier this year.

I am contemplating withdrawing or taking the June test and immediately canceling. If I withdraw, I will lose money. If I take and cancel, I will also lose money BUT I will at least have had the experience of sitting and taking an offical LSAT.

The only other consideration is that I can not take the September LSAT due to work scheduling and I will instead be taking the December LSAT. I would like to apply this upcoming fall and I am a bit worried that December is late for the LSAT...

Thoughts?

Thank you.

Is there anyone in the Peoria, Illinois area who would be willing to practice Logic Games with me? I could use a little help.

Hi 7sagers!

What kinds of patterns have you seen emerge in MBT/MSS questions? For example, I personally have seen that for conditional - heavy stimuli, LSAC loves to use mistaken reversals & mistaken negations as wrong answer choices.

Are there any other patterns that you have noticed -- perhaps other patterns in the answer choices, in the stimulus structure, or in the way the answer choices relate to the stimulus?

I am about a third of the way done with the CC and plan on taking the LSAT in February 2018 (unless I'm not ready in which case, I will push back to June). I have fully subscribed to JY's notion of taking the test when ready not necessarily by a deadline so am in no rush. That being said, when would be a good time to start admissions prep? I have not thought much about it as I am more focused on mastering the test but I also don't want to be surprised and then have to scramble to throw together a (hopefully) good admissions packet. I feel like it shouldn't even be on my radar now but I have heard from other people that they spend part of their study time on admissions prep. Is there ever a time when it's too early to start ... or too late?

Hi I got the correct answer A, but only through the process of elimination. I am slightly bothered by the AC's somewhat extreme tone, "best."

Can I say that it is justified because the supporting textual evidence (line 10-11) says "preferred?"

I am just wondering in general: when is the extreme tone in the RC inference AC justified, and when is it not?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-4-passage-2-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-4-passage-2-questions/

So I fell for a sufficient assumption trap, I chose the answer that was basically a restated premise, so for the assumption questions, the answer that is basically a premise, is that always wrong? TYA!

I've studied for the LSAT before, but I've never PT'd with logic games that are only on one page. How do you deal with this?

Is there any sort of historical data somewhere that displays the likelihood of certain logic games appearing by type?

Hey all,

I've noticed that every now and then I will see an argument that doesn't seem to have any glaring flaws, if any at all. Sure enough, it's a principle question in the range of 17-23...so I know I better be hyper-alert because this is going to be tricky. I proceed to read through the answer choices and immediately throw away 2 of them because they are completely irrelevant. Now, to the nitty gritty :

Example: "...therefore, that ought not be done for it is both immoral and would cause more harm than good."

The correct answer would be something like "Anything that goes against common moral belief and does not help society but instead damages society ought not be done." Obviously, this happens to be an assumption as well.

BUT, among the answer choices one will find something along the lines of "anything immoral ought not be done" and "Actions that cause more harm than good are immoral." Both are attractive for their own reasons since the first seems to be reasonably supported by the conclusion, but not SO much as the conclusion mentions two criteria and the second combines the two elements of the conclusion but in reality is not supported by the conclusion.

All of this said, I think that I've identified a pattern here with principle questions and I'm looking for some validation. When answering a principle question, one must look for (and find) and exact match to the information discussed in the stimulus. There will be answer choices that maybe fall "inside the realm" of the stimulus but they are not an exact match that would validate the conclusion.

Thanks in advance!

Hey guys,

I plan on taking the LSAT in September and I want to focus on just logic games for about 3-4 weeks (as long as it takes to get to a near perfect score really). I took it back in December and the only thing that brought my score down was LG - so before I get back to PTing and targeting certain questions, I want to do LG

Right now I'm doing every LG section from PT 1-20 - two sections a day. Really trying to master it. My question is is my time better spent doing LG sections from PTs 40-60 instead?. Everyone knows that we should prioritize the modern PTs, and I want to get the most bang for my buck. So should I hop straight to those?

Thanks