Hi Guys,

I got accepted for testing accommodations for the lsat in a few weeks. I viewed the confirmation letter and it says that I am testing on 6/17 and report time is 830. Is this correct? It isn't June 12 like everybody else?

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?

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?

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/

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.

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?

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! =)

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!!

Hi everyone, is there a study/blind review group for those prepping to take the test in September or December? If not, can we start one? The support of a study group is invaluable during this tough time!

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?

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!

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.

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?

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.

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!

hi, can someone explain why answer choice e isnt a match? I'm still not 100% sure after BRing and watching the explination vid.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-2-question-21/

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

Hello everyone!

This may be a really silly question, but does anyone know if when we sit to take the actual LSAT if it is printed double or single sided? I have been studying using single sided PTs since I think it's helpful for the logic games/reading comprehension to be able to see everything without flipping the page over constantly. But it would be nice to know what it will actually be like on the LSAT so I can study in the most realistic way possible.

Thank you all :)

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?

Come to this review session if you have taken PT 80 and/or you attended JY's PT 80s review. This will be a great chance to pick up on what others have learned from PT 80 and to combine the different techniques we learned from the various sessions with JY.

Summary Review of what we learned fr JY's PT 80 Sessions, Saturday June 27th at 5PM EST

Click here to join this conversation: (Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/617377325" target="_blank" rel="nofollow")

Please click the link and comment if you plan on participating.

You can also dial in to the BR call by using your phone.

United States: +1 (872) 240-3212

Access Code: 617-377-325

The Full Schedule

And if you’d like to see the full schedule for upcoming sessions, here it is:

https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=il5ia3a4dmghh6lku7b0lh0ed0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York

Note:

Hey guys!

I was hoping to get some opinions on this.....

I put up a post a while back about HOW I should undertake studying for the LSAT. I purchased the Ultimate package and I'm starting to study again..but facing the same struggle I faced the first time, "Do I want to go to law school? Why am I taking this test?" I don't know any lawyers personally, so I'm basing all of my ideas off books, blogs, and websites. I met with a pre-law advisor and he asked what I'd majored in. When I answered history and told them that I also just finished my MA (again in history), he told me that obviously I had a passion and should follow that passion. I've thought about teaching, but I've also read negative things about that too. If someone were to ask me, "why teach history?" I'd be able to run you down a list of reasons why. Ask me "why law?" I'd give you a blank stare...the only semi-positive being the opportunity to earn more.

Anyway...sorry for the long post. Basically, I was wondering if anybody else feels this from time to time - should you be 100% sure law school and being a lawyer is for you before taking this test and investing time (and money)? Do people feel "passion" for the law or being a lawyer?

Thanks! xo

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

Hey guys! I pushed back my test from June to September because my job had become a little more demanding for me this past spring (we slow down over the summer). I would love to stay in the Philadelphia area and would also love to go to Temple. I'm aiming for a 160 on my LSAT but my diagnostics and my past two preptests have been in the 140s, BRing in the 150s. LR seems to be the hardest for me so I decided to get the LSAT Trainer and work through Mike Kim's LR drills. TIP: If anyone finds that LR is also hard for them, I think Kim's explanations and drills are EXTREMELY helpful. I'm super excited to get started on the September BR calls. I think I'll really be able to up my score by having a core schedule each week. I've been finding it difficult to get on that train with ya know... life.

Anyways, I was wondering if my stats looked good for a school like Temple or above that and/or if any female URM has had the same stats as me and where they have gotten accepted into.

-URM female (black and puerto-rican)

GPA: 3.67

LSAT- Aiming for the 160s

Major: Political Science and Spanish

Work Experience- I've only been out of school for two years but I've worked 5 years in PA politics and now currently work for a Global Investigations company- between the two of these career paths I'll have great LR's (DOJ attorneys, WH advisors (former, def not current haha), various agencies, and a PA inspector general).

I'm hoping with all of this combined it will give me a really good shot at some schools! What do you guys think?

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!