OKAY. So.

I'm taking in June; I've been studying for about a year and a half. I don't want to do so much over the next few weeks as to burnout, but also I want to feel like I'm not letting myself get rusty (this increases my anxiety which is bad for lots of reasons too). I still have about 8 PTs left, which I'm not sure I'll be able to get to. I obviously know not to expect any major score increases; that's not what I'm going for. I just want to stay consistent and steady.

Anyone have a magic formula as to how much time I should be spending each day/week? Anyone who has taken and burnt out, what would you suggest I definitely avoid doing? (I've already stopped drinking alcohol - btw)

Is doing 1 drill 3 times a week (3 drills total with BR) + 1 PT on weekends & BR too much? Am I going to burn out on this schedule? Help my nerves are bad. <3 yall

When doing games, I like to attempt to solve as many probabilities as possible before going on to the questions. In short, spend time upfront in order to save time when answering questions.

However, after doing four or more boards, I begin to realize that there are too many probabilities to solve in order to complete the game in a good time.

My question is, are there any clues to look out for to help me not attempt to solve all probabilities?

How can you tell that it is not better to try to solve everything up front????

"Finding the conclusion" is as easy as riding a bicycle... and as hard, for struggling students.

I have noticed that the word "should" is as helpful as "thus" or "therefore" when it comes to finding a conclusion. Unlike the typical conclusion keywords, "should" appears in conclusions because conclusions tend to be recommendations, predictions, and judgments. (See Kaplan's list of six conclusion types for more on this.) "Should" can be used for all three of those sentence forms.

Sometimes "should" appears in a premise as well as the conclusion. This routinely happens in moral arguments (we should obey the law, the law says drive 55, therefore we should drive 55). While it is possible to use "should" in a premise but not in the conclusion, I have yet to find example of that happening in a published LSAT question.

As usual, I'm looking for criticism (constructive or otherwise) and counterexamples. This may not be a big deal for you folks who have been riding your bicycle for years, but it's a small step forward for the folks who are still on training wheels.

Hello!

My last few preptests have been roughly the same in terms of score (164 average) but my LG score has been decreasing rapidly. For example, the last few preptest have been -1, -2, -3, -5, and -7, respectively, on LG. I was just wondering if anyone else has gone through this and if you could recommend a plan of action to fix this before the June test. I was thinking about going back and redoing all of the lessons, and focusing more on fool proof review, but I am not sure what else to do.

Thanks!

I have been MIA around here lately because I've been mostly just testing, drilling, and BRing. But I just wanted to say that thanks to JY & 7Sage, my average for my last 5 tests is FINALLY up to170. Still a few weeks out from test day (June), and still a bit of work to go, but I'm finally feeling confident and prepared for test day. I'm so happy I was able to find this resource and this community. Thanks J.Y. <3 & everyone else

I'm having trouble applying contrapositives because in many instances they seem like bunk. Specifically, it seems like they require unsupported assumptions other than those that can be derived from game rules. Here is an example:

A group of three must be selected from the variables, A, B, C, D, & E:

1. If C is not selected, then B is not selected

2. D and E cannot both be selected

3. In order for A to be selected, B must be selected.

According to the study guide that I'm using, the contrapositive of rule 1 is, if B -> C. As I see it, although B -> C may be true there is nothing that requires it to be true. To my mind and contrary to the contrapositive of rule 1, it is also possible, although not required under the rules that if B is selected then C is still not selected. That being said, contrapositives are a proven concept and its unlikely that I'm right and my study book is wrong, so what am I missing, what systematic leap in logic am missing to make the concept of contrapositives useful on the LSAT? Thanks

I have been studying logical reasoning stimuli that include a sentence about what someone OTHER than the author says, usually near the start of the paragraph. I call these the "some people say" statements. They are different from "expert testimony," which supports the conclusion. These "some people say" statements do NOT support the conclusion. In fact, after looking at them carefully, it looks like almost every conclusion in a "some people say" stimulus is a simple negation of the "some people say" statement.

I like the term "antithesis" for these statements, since the "thesis" of the stimulus is the conclusion and the "some people say" text is the logical opposite of that.

Admin: Removed link to blog. Please read rules on advertising:

https://classic.7sage.com/discussion#/discussion/15/forum-rules

I would love to know if anybody can find any counterexamples to this "some people say" rule. If not, then it would provide a simple and teachable logical reasoning shortcut. Just "find the anthithesis" near the top of the stimulus, negate it, and find the evidence to support that negation. It's easy to find if you know what you're looking for.

Hey y'all,

You asked for it. So now you're getting it. Here's the BR Group Calendar, including June-oriented (but open to all) dates as well as dates leading up to the September test: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=7sage.com_ft05lsm54j4ec1s6kj1d1bbpv0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/Chicago

Note: I know there was talk of y'all doing this on Sundays, but Saturdays have been a mainstay of 7sage BR Groups since their inception. There are many reasons why it should be Saturday and not Sunday—not the least of which is the fact that people have work on Mondays and BR Group calls often go late into the night ;) However, there will be Sunday dates until the beginning of June so as to accommodate folks who are taking it in June as well as Sept.

And don't forget that BR Group calls will be GUIDED by a Sage on Saturdays until further notice (at least into May).

Can someone explain the reasoning behind answer choice (B)? I'm not 100% sure why oxygen-18 in seawater is increased, not decreased.

Thanks in advance! :)

I was wondering if anyone has used a consulting service after submitting applications to either get off waitlists, or negotiate additional scholarships? If so could you please share your experience & if it was worth it?

I am approaching this question as a pseudo-assumption Q, how an I translate to lawgic?

Jarrett-->should not have criticized (premise)

Pointing out defects benefitted no one (conclusion)

???? Stuck at this point....

Thanks in advance!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-3-question-20

The game begins:

Three buildings (A, B, and C) sit next to each other on a city block and each buidling has three floors. On each floor, the lights are either on or off.

If you recognize this game (the game date is not specified) please explain the following:

In the explanation it says that B2 is always on, whether B has all 3 or just 2 lights on. My question is, why can't B1 and B3 be on with B2 off?

If I need to write out the whole game, let me know. It's driving me crazy!!

Hey 7Sagers,

I'm starting this thread so we can have a few laughs. Share your scariest LSAT nightmare(s)!

I woke up in a Saw game. Jigsaw informed me that I had TWENTY minutes to finish one of the hardest LG sections I've ever seen (PT 27 with the snakes and lizards game, omg).

Hey Guys,

Needed some help with diagramming a couple of sentences into lawgic and their contraceptives.

1. If Aliens or Ghosts are in the house, then Tim and John are not in the house...Is the info I have written below correct?

- The way I have diagrammed this is like: A or G --> /T and /J. Taken further, this becomes: A --> /T, A --> /J ; G --> /T, G --> J. If Aliens are in the house, then Tom is not there. If Aliens are in the house, then John is not there. If Ghosts are in the house, then Tom is not there. If Ghosts are in the house, then John is not there.

- Contrapositive: T or J --> /A and /G. Taken further, this becomes: T --> /A, T --> /G ; J --> /A, J --> /G. If Tom is in the house, then Aliens are not the house. If Tom is in the house, then Ghosts are not in the house. If John is in the house, then Aliens are not in the house. If John is in the house, then Ghosts are in the house.

2. Totally confused about diagramming "Tom will play really well for his soccer team if John or Bill, but not both, play on the same team as him."

I understand that John or Bill, but not both will be diagrammed as /J (--) B, where contrapositive is J (--) /B. But how do I diagram the info about Tom. Is this correct? /J (--) B --> T? If yes, what will be the contrapositive?

Thanks for your help, as always.

Hi, I'm a bit confused with the rule "M and N cannot be selected together."

Is this a biconditional with never together always apart? so, M (--) ~N

Or do I use 'cannot' and think of it as group 4? so, M --> ~N

Which one would be correct?

Thanks for the help.

I have a quick question I am confused on. Does every section on the LSAT start with the easiest questions, then progressively move on to the hardest? As in, would question 1 be the easiest and then question 25 (or whatever the last question is) ends on the hardest?

I was wondering if anyone knows how to change the video speed when watching on an iPad? When on my computer I obviously just mouse over the video and the speed options pop up, but I can't seem to them to show on my iPad. Whenever I tap the video it either starts or pauses. The timeline also pops up along with the option to full screen, but no speed options. How do I access them?

So, like everything else in my LSAT prep before coming to 7Sage, I led up to my test date completely wrong. Aside from simply being unprepared, I went into my second take in the midst of full flown burn out. For my first take, I woke up late and when I got to my testing center discovered there was a football game on the campus that day and all the parking was blocked off. I made it there on time, but throughout the entire test I was worried my car was going to get towed.

So this time, I’m putting a lot of thought into the lead up. Has anyone else developed a strategy for leading up to the test? Day of? A week out? A month out? What are some of y’all's plans?

The consensus is that just about everyone is able to come up with a topic that warrants a diversity statement. In only rare cases is there a cookie cutter profile that just doesn't have a single iota of diversity in its repertoire. I am all but thoroughly convinced that I am one of those rare cases and I suppose I could ironically be diverse in this sense. But I was a first-gen college graduate; my dad tried college before having to drop out a semester later due to finances. My mom went to adult college when I was a pre-teen but never finished. I'm the oldest in my family and was the first of anyone in my family to graduate, though my younger sister did graduate the following year.

I did not have any financial issues during college, nor did I have any upon graduating. Getting into college wasn't a struggle for me like it was for my parents. Both my mom and dad clearly wanted their kids to attend college and to in general live a life that they were unable to live.

While I was fortunate enough to practically trip and fall into a 4-year undergraduate program, I definitely viewed myself and my potential in a harmful light. My mentality throughout high school and throughout most of college was that I obviously wasn't a genius; therefore, I shouldn't bother striving to achieve a 4.0 or to stand out from the rest, and I think being a first-gen graduate played a significant role in this. There are of course more details to this than just that, but what do you all think of me having been a first-gen graduate, albeit an unremarkable one? Is this workable for a diversity statement, or am I stretching way too far here?

What are some of the strategies and techniques you all use to reach a perfect 180 on BR? What is a typical range for questions circled for further review? What do you do with questions you didn't circle but actually missed? What for questions you missed after a BR? What are some of the best ways to collect previous missed questions for future review?

Below are some of the strategies I've used. I haven't scored a perfect one 180 on BR, however, so others' tips would be much appreciated!

- Chronicling the reasons behind my wrong answer choices, tallying the number of times this happens, and recording the PT number on which a respective mistake was made.

- This may seem like an obvious one but wasn't a strategy I adopted until later - I examine my relative strength in each question type (especially for LR) for my five most recent PTs. From there, I review the core curriculum for the question type at issue, review previous missed questions of that type, and drill specifically on that question type.

- Coming into each PT with full awareness of what I am weak at and possibly reviewing these areas beforehand. This way, I am prepared to avoid the many past traps in which I have customarily fallen.

I plan to strart studying one month prior to the LSAT test. Am I the only one?

I found this little nugget during the time I should have been doing something productive. Glad I did!

I've been accepted to two T-14 schools and am now trying to compare the different LRAPs and general student debt assistance programs they offer. I'm unfamiliar with some of the terms and don't fully understand some of the conditions for the programs. Does anyone know where I can get a good, easy-to-understand, general explanation of how these programs work? Would be immensely grateful for the help :)

Decided to take a break from LSAT study and came across this sketch on YouTube.

Hope you guys do really well on the LSAT and in law school, but not become anything like Jason Grey???

.