Hi everyone,

I've been drilling RC from old PT's (1-7) and I've worked myself down to -2.

In PT36-45, I've worked to get myself to score around -5, and as low as -2 or -3.

I recently took PT 62-63 and I couldn't even finish the section both times.

I've met with a great expert on LSAT in 7sage (Can't Get Right) who recommended a notation strategy for active reading.

I'm pretty sure my main issue is passage absorption; rushing through the passage and not being quite sure of what I've read.

Have any of you noticed any transgressions of this sort; or am I alone?

How did you overcome it, and any advice for me?

Thanks!

Hey everyone,

For the Question Sets in the CC, what is your method for blind reviewing them? What I do is go through each of the questions timed (jotting down how long it took me for each one), circle the ones I'm not positive on, and then go back to review the ones I circled without any time constrains. I feel as if that's pretty standard.

However, I was wondering what everyone does after going over the answers. Do you make a notation of your before and after BR performance on the Question Set sheets? For the ones that you got wrong, do you write out the reasons for each answer choice on the Question Set sheet? Basically what I'm looking for is a method for documentation so I know how reference it as well as a way to "shatter my reasoning" for wrong answers.

Hello everyone,

I was hoping for some advice on how to study for the September LSAT. I took the June 2007 Diagnostic and scored a 158. I was at 80-85% on both the LR and RC but was at 65% for the LG section. My goal is to score in the high 160's or low 170's.

Onto my more precise question which is how I should split up my attention between materials.

My study materials

All three Powerscore Bibles

The LSAT Trainer

Manhattan LR Book

7Sage Premium + Access

My question is, what order should I work through these? Any other more general advice would be GREATLY appreciated.

Thanks!

I've been struggling with a bunch of the LR questions and have gone back into the CC and used up almost of all of my questions sets.

I'm tired of looking at questions that I've done before because I remember what the answer is pretty much. Would it be bad if I burned the rest of the 30's to give myself some new questions to look at?

Can someone explain to me this stimulus? It says "Which one of the following could be an accurate and complete list of the students who review only Sunset?" Usually, the "complete and accurate" stimuli want a list of all the items across all possible worlds that fulfill the requirement. However, in this problem, they are apparently only asking for the students in 1 world. So answer C says J and L, which would be true if you looked at all possible worlds (ie J can review only S in one world whereas L can't, and L can review only S in another world where J can't). However, the correct answer is A, which says only L. Answer A thus only applies to 2 of the 3 possible worlds. I don't understand how the stimulus specifies this. It reads exactly the same as stimului from other games that are asking across all possible worlds.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-42-section-1-game-4/

When I tried signing up for the June LSAT a few days ago (late, I know), I was placed on a waiting list for a test center in the Los Angeles area since there were no spots available. I received an email from LSAC yesterday stating I've been assigned to a center that's at a hotel (Irvine Marriott). Should I be nervous about not taking the test at a University? I'm not sure whether this test center has been used before in the past. I tried looking up the test center number and any reviews from people who may have taken the LSAT there but didn't find anything. Thoughts?

To all my fellow LSATers, I urge you to keep studying hard. Remember that while this test is important, it does not define you as a person. To all my fellow undergrads, kill it on your finals and study hard this summer. I look forward to utilizing you all for legal advice in the future, because 7sage LSATers will undoubtedly make the best lawyers!

Just curious. It said I'd used 5/6 tests or something at the bottom. This seems strange. Also, is there a way to identify your most missed question types via analytics?

I don't get the explanation for why A is right. All we know is that do produce a good meal you can't have bad food. That would seem to imply that you could have a good meal with mediocre food. So how can you then take the the next conditional relationship between bad soil and good food to prove anything about good meals. All you can prove is that you can't have good food with bad soil. But maybe you can have mediocre food with bad soil. And if so, you can possibly produce a good meal with bad soil, since mediocre food can possibly produce a good meal.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-37-section-2-question-12/

Have you done this problem? I'm seeking justification for the correct answer choice.

It would be great to have JY analyze it in a video.

Hi everyone!!

I'm new and I can't seem to figure out where I go to print out the games that are incorporated into the syllabus (ie. Practice Test 16, game 2 etc etc etc....way before PT 36, for which we have full game access.)

Can you please help me figure out how to do this? I really want to retry these games on my own

Natalie

Hi. I'm not sure how to translate "those in search of jobs should move to a city with high-tech businesses" into lawgic. I thought the word "should" might be a necessary condition, but JY didn't put an arrow to connect JOBS and HIGH TECH. Whereas in Manhattan forum, one of the instructors translated it as "if you want JOBS, go to HT" which would require the use of an arrow. So I'm not sure which is the right approach to take..

Also, is it even a valid argument?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-25/

Hey everyone,

I'm done with the LSAT and moving to a new place at the end of the week. I have a bunch of unused or very lightly used (some penciled notes, or maybe a couple of sections done) LSAT prep materials that I'd prefer to pass on to another 7Sager who can use them, rather than just throw away.

If you live in the Washington DC area and are interested, and able to pick these up by the end of the week, let me know.

Materials included:

Also, my understanding that it would be completely ethical to just give these away (I am NOT selling them). But if that's not the case, I'd appreciate if someone would flag this for me.

Thanks!

I'm having trouble understanding the translation for the conditional logic to this question.

All material bodies are divisible into parts,

Material bodies --> Divisible

and everything divisible is imperfect.

Divisible --> NOT perfect

It follows that all material bodies are imperfect.

material bodies --> NOT perfect

It like wise follows that the spirit is not a material body.

Spirits --> NOT material bodies.

I chained this question up like this (which is wrong I think):

Material bodies --> NOT Spirits

Material bodies --> Divisible --> NOT perfect

There are two conditional arrows connected to Material bodies, but I represented it like this because I can't draw it out here.

The answer shows the chain like this:

Material bodies --> Divisible --> NOT perfect --> NOT Spirits

How did they come up with this chain?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-24-section-3-question-10/

Hi guys, so I need some clarity on PTing and Blind reviewing. So far I have taken only 3 PT and have gone thru the CC twice + the LSAT trainer. So far the scores have been 148, 150, 154 (slowly making my way up sadly LOL) (my diagnostic before I started studying was about 136). Blind review scores are in the 160s. I think the timing aspect really threw me off first time on the PT and I have been trying to get a handle of it. Per section, I am guessing a solid 6 questions at least for LR, and about a whole passage for RC usually because i'm out of time. LG is good - I can do all the games on time, usually -2 on games. I am taking a PT once a week.

However, I really want to be PTing in at least low 160s (which is my blind review score right now). So I am really confused as to how I should get my blind review up at this point.

I try to drill and practice as much as I can from old PTs before I take the next PT and watch all the explanations for the PT I took. I also review concepts in the CC. I have also been writing out explanations for questions that have me confused between 2 answer choices.

Is there anything else I should be doing?? Thank you for the help!!!

Side note; love how helpful 7sage community is as this exam can be really frustrating.

Join us as we go over PT 75!

PT 75 Review on Saturday, April 29th at 5PM ET

Try this first---- https://www.gotomeeting.com/ and then enter the code 617-377-325

Click here to join this conversation: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/617377325

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=aWw1aWEzYTRkbWdoaDZsa3U3YjBsaDBlZDBAZ3JvdXAuY2FsZW5kYXIuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbQ

Note:

Sufficient Assumption question

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-48-section-4-question-21/

Under the timed condition, I got this question right by diagramming as follows:

Context: Ignore unpleasant realities and tell small lies (A) → Sincerity (/B) (B → /A)

Premise: Succeed (C) → Trust (D)

Conclusion: Succeed (C) → face unpleasant realities and speak about them honestly (/A) (ignore unpleasant realities and tell small lies)

Answer choice

(A): D → B

So I picked (A) and moved on.

However, when I was BRing, I got confused by the first sentence:

"Traditional norms (...) prevent sincerity by requiring one to ignore unpleasant realities and tell small lies."

Because of the word "require," I thought I should diagram as

(1) Sincerity (/B) → Ignore unpleasant realities and tell small lies (A) (/B → A)

(Basically this means if you want to prevent sincerity you have to ignore unpleasant realities and tell small lies.)

Since I couldn't connect the chains, I thought again and thought I was right diagramming as follows:

(2) Ignore unpleasant realities and tell small lies (A) → Sincerity (/B) (B → /A)

(If you ignore unpleasant realities and tell small lies, you can prevent sincerity)

But is (2) the right way to diagram this? Is it correct to think that "by" is a sufficient condition indicator? :(

Any help would be very much appreciated!!

Hi all

I cannot find any reason why (C) is wrong here.

It seems to me that (C) eliminates one alternative cause (genetic cause?) and thereby strengthen the argument that P-fat is responsible for the development of eyesight.

I compared (C) with (A) in S4Q17 in the same PT. (A) eliminates one possibility alternative by saying that "Earth did not pass through clouds of cosmic dust earlier than 800,000 years ago. This is because it negates an possibility that something other than fluctuation might have caused ice-age if the ice-age had occurred earlier than 800,000 years ago when the fluctuation started to happen. (A) turned out to strengthen the argument. Then, why does (C) not strengthen the argument? (I mean Q14)

Thank you very much

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-44-section-4-question-14/

Currently studying for the September 2017, it is useful to practice the logical Reasoning, Logic Games and Reading Comp. questions from PrepTest 1-20...

From BR'ing, I've noted fundamental concepts of of strengthening/weakening cause and effect arguments. For instance, you can strengthen the argument by saying that in the absence of the cause, we don't have the effect.

My question is where this was in the curriculum - I watched the videos on causation theory but couldn't find it there, nor did I find it in strengthening/weakening lessons.

Hello everyone,

I was wondering if anyone could give me some advice on what to do regarding getting better with LG. As of right now, I am working through the Powerscore LG Bible. I am struggling with making inferences to basic linear games and am consistently missing at least 1-2 per game of that nature.

I was wondering if I should be going through a different book in conjunction with this program? Also, where would you recommend I start in the course in order to get right into LG. I bought premium access and have the general concepts of logic down from the Powerscore material.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

I was only able to answer this Q correctly by process of elimination.

I am still unsure why A is right on its own merit, however.

Isn't it too much of an assumption to say that Chopin thinks that their idealization was "misguided?"

I know that Chopin does not "agree" with them and does not "share" their nostalgia.

But how do you infer from "not sharing" to "misguided?"

I may disagree with someone else's opinion, and can still think that someone's opinion is valid/ worth its own merit etc.

"Misguided" just sounds too strong for me and kind of out of character for the LSAT.

Could anyone explain further? Many thanks.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-63-section-4-passage-2-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-63-section-4-passage-2-questions/

Hi all! I'm just getting started on the Core Curriculum. In order to plan ahead, I'd like to figure out what comes immediately after the completion of the Core Curriculum. Do you head into the PTs right away -- or do you spend time doing more practice on problem sets from PTs 1-35 (esp. the Foolproof Method for logic games), in addition to the drills that are already part of the Core Curriculum? If it's the latter, how many weeks should one generally plan on spending on extra problem sets before doing PT 36 & beyond?

I just wanted to ask you fellow Sagers about this... plus I'd love to hear how you use BR! I just cannot find the positive usage of if for me and my study habits.

When setting up to take PT I always play the recording of what the instructor will say on the test day, as well as fill in all appropriate bubbling, in addition to the handwritten affidavit. I use the 7sage app for background noise/the instructor saying when it's 5(?I'm not sure) left and then when to put your pencils down. I don't use the timer but always use a special LSAT Wristwatch, to get used to reading a clock manually and linking it to the number of questions left. I try to match the "testing" environment as much as I can to the actual test day to minimize any test taking anxiety (or just my general anxiety) when the real day comes. ALSO!!!!signed up for a digist lsat for a free in Chicago. You guys should look into this if you have not already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Okay that was long winded sorry, lol. My main problem with BR is that it places this mentality in my head, however hard I try not to let it linger or acknowledge it, that it's OK as in not stressed or even to get it wrong (silly, I know), because even if I get the first choice wrong, it's almost always my second answers (I have finally broke into the 170s threshold and am getting pretty confident with answer selections.) I have always had issues with second guessing myself, where I could see how BR would be useful, but learning this way doesn't seem to solidify in my head that I was actually WRONG. With this mentality, it doesn't uhm, I guess I don't feel the 100% INCORRECT feeling you get when going over a question, confidentiality answering the question without BR, only to find out at the end of the test when you review all the answers it's WRONG. I see the similarity between this approach and BR, you still go back to review to see your question is wrong, but usually, you have the right one for the 2nd question. It's like a small boost to your ego like "well, I just second guessed myself, I'll catch it next time" or "well, I'll improve by test day." But sometimes, it's not that. It's that you just don't know this question stem to a near pefection, and with BR, I don't internalize that knowledge.

Maybe it's just how I've adjusted my brain to studying for this LSAT, but I don't find much use for BR, or maybe not at least this late in this study game.I'm so used to the SHAME associated with taking tests and missing answers in grade school, even college really. You take the test, acknowledge your score, and shamefully stuff away the test to avoid looking or attempting to comprehend the answers you missed... But with the LSAT it's constantly encouraging you to say HEY LOOK HERE, ANOTHER QUESTIONS WRONG! :) And then drill, drill, drill, drill until it comes naturally. I kinda of love the LSAT because of this honestly, even if I've painstaking spent a year of my life studying for this damned thing. Unique little bastard.

Ok to reiterate, Is this bad not liking or using BR? I see so many people loving BR and I feel silly for never having given it a real try, maybe a test or two. I'm honestly shooting for 175-180, and I've hit 175 once YAY! In the 169-170s since Feb. But my GPA is a 2.5 so I have to have an outstanding LSAT score to have any chance at a top school.

Sorry for the long winded post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I appreciate your comments :)

What do you think are the pros + cons of attending the same law school as one’s undergrad? I’m really debating whether or not I even want to apply to my undergrad for law school (considering the application fees + effort and all). I’ve accumulated a list and I would really like others’ input as well!