Anyone else down for another PS swap??

I think sometimes they disagree each other in both premise and conclusion, (different premises and lead to opposite conclusions)

and sometimes they only disagree with either premise or conclusion. (arrive at the same conclusion using different premises or using the same premise but arrive at the different conclusion)

When they have opposite conclusions and different premises, the question can really ask either about premise and concision discrepancy right?

For example, PT79S4Q20.

They disagree with both premises conclusions right?

The conclusions are implied---For Edgar, the conclusion is do NOT shutdown, but for Rafaela, DO shutdown.

Hi guys,

So here is what I have written down in my notebook as a problem I am having. If you have any good solutions please let me know.

So this is what I have written down today in my notebook:

1. When the question asks to refer back to specific passages, correctly identifying the referencing passage is key.

2. After the referential passage is correctly identified, the section of the paragraph should be read in sizeable amount as to capture the underlying meaning in a complete or sufficient manner. Even if there is a passage break in between, the beginning of the next passage should be read as well to identify for any hints.

3. A question can be made difficult by the author through applying referential phrasing in the sentence which it directly is referring. Under such circumstance, patience and care should apply and the main intended topic needs to be draw-out through back solving.

4. A question can be selected wrong for this set of questions when there is a answer choice that directly points out the main point of the passage. Under referencing questions, this reference only applies to the sentence which it is pointing instead of the main point. The brain has a tendency to go with the familiar without actually drawing a constraint for the task at hand.

Please let me know how you deal with this situation.

I took the OCT 2015 lsats for the first time and I did absolutely horrible . I only received at most 3 1/2 hrs of sleep and went to do the exam on an empty stomach . Within the second section I just wanted the test to be over with ; I also guessed on a majority of the LG games . I ended up scoring a 139. I started studying again and decided to take in September 2016 . I felt like I was better prepared ; I took a full time Power Score course , studied from 4-7 hrs a day and the whole nine yards . I made sure I got a good night rest the day before and ate before taking the test. I ended up scoring a 140. I don't know what else to do , I really need assistance smh .

I have noticed that when I try and switch question types a bunch..i.e. take a practice test, that I do much worse than if i can do 2 or three of the same type then move to the next question type, like in the lesson. Has anyone tried to mark the question types first? I know it would be a time sink though..

PS I timed myself marking the question type and it took me 2:30.

Silly question, but I'm fairly addicted to caffeine, and was wondering what the best strategy for caffeine intake on test day is. My concern about drinking a large amount of coffee during breakfast is that I'll have to go to the restroom before the built-in break, or that holding it in will literally distract me from the exam. Are you allowed to bring caffeine pills/5 hour energy type drinks into the exam room (in your ziplock bag)? I was thinking that could be a half-way solution.

Guys honestly I'm doing pretty well in LR-3-5 and -2LG thanks J.Y....but I just can't get my RC Down to at least -7 or even -8 ... I've tried speed reading doesn't work I've tried notes doesn't work.... I realize it's like a super slow developing skill active reading that is but any concrete tips would really help I'm going to experiment this week before the test... please any thing solid would be appreciated!

Hello,

I was wondering which is better in terms of:

-sleep well

-no anxiety on the test day

Is it better to stay in a hotel close to the test center for a day or two, or commute from home?

What are you going to do?

Thanks,

Thanks for all the great answers!

Hey, hope this is the right place for this to go. I had a search of the forum and didn't see this question discussed before, so thought I'd throw out my 2 cents.

Doing some drills before this week's test I noticed a much faster way of getting to the right answer choice on Question 1 of Game 1 in this PT, compared to the video explanation. In the video JY skips Q1 because by the end of G1 you have more points of reference with which to brute force it. But I think it's perfectly do-able with just the rules, and I think it's a fast inference.

I set the game up the same as JY, except instead of representing his rule 1 with two crossed out and stacked boxes of BB (boy, boy) and GG (girl, girl), I just used the notation 1+ ---> BG. I think this notation helped me more quickly spot the inference I'm about to explain here.

So from the initial setup and from the first indented prompt we know that the game is going to have 3 lockers with one person in, and 2 lockers with two people in.

Combine this rule with JY's (or my) rule 1 and we then know that there is going to be two lockers with BG in there.

For the next two rules (rules 2 and 3) I used the exact same notation as JY.

As JY explains, from rule 2 and 3 we know J will have to share with N or T, since R must be alone. This allows for a further, vey simple inference which I didn't see JY make with respect to Q1.

We know we have two shared lockers with 1B and 1G in there, and we know that one of those two shared lockers is J and N/T. Since we know that the other shared locker has to have 1B and 1G in it, we then know that the other shared locker is going to have a girl in it. But there's only three girls. And one of them is going with J, and the other is always on her own (R). So the girl that goes in the other shared locker is just the one left over from our choice in the J, N/T locker. (T/N)

Thus, just from this basic inference from the setup and rules 2 and 3 we know at the very least that in the two shared lockers we will have J and N/T and, in the other, T/N. This allows us to completely solve question 1.

All we need to do is look for an answer choice that has J, N and T in it. Since only one answer choice has all these three in it, we know E is right straight away. If there was another answer choice that was, say, J N T and F, then we would have to check to see if F needs to share. But luckily there isn't, so you can answer it right away.

Hope this makes sense!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-31-section-1-game-1/

I chose B without a second thought, also on the BR. I get why A, C, D do not work. I do understand that E is descriptively correct, but I still consider the claim in question to be a conclusion, therefore making B acceptable. Could you please persuade me that the claim is in fact not a conclusion?

This is my reasoning for its being a conclusion:

Willingness to pay is not proportional to need, since in the real world, some people simply cannot pay as much as others. As a result (of the fact that 'in the real world, some people simply...), a price increase will allocate goods to the people with the most money, not to those with the most need.

If you need a break from studying, or you're trying to remember why you're doing this in the first place, Slate's Working podcast just released a great episode on what an immigration lawyer actually does all day:

https://player.fm/series/slate-magazine-daily-podcast/working-the-how-does-an-immigration-lawyer-work-edition

Do you answer those questions by memory or go back to the passage?

Or like...

After you finish reading passage A you go through all questions?

I've just gone through the "Grouping Games with a Chart" lessons, and for each of the four games -- two in the lessons and two in the problem set -- as an experiment I did NOT use a chart but instead used a "standard" grouping diagram that allows members to have multiple memberships. Multiple memberships is said to be the condition which dictates use of a chart. In none of the four did I have any more of a problem answering questions than JY did.

Furthermore, for a couple of the games the final question not only added a rule but removed one of the original ones. For these, JY abandoned his chart and started over with a new one. I didn't do this with my diagram, and am unclear as to why JY started over. In each case it seemed easy enough to see the implications of the rule change to my original diagram. JY's motivation for starting over seemed to be that he was afraid he would miss a required change to his original chart.

My challenge: can someone cite a game for which a chart definitely saves time?

Hi everyone,

I'm finishing up a couple of applications today and I noticed that one application gives me an option to list the other law schools I am applying to.

I'm not sure if I should fill this out or not - is there an advantage/disadvantage to doing so?

I read the following (I think on one of the Manhattan prep forums) about weakening questions.

On weakening questions, when the argument posits a causal relationship, we seek an answer choice that does one of the following three things.

1. Provides an alternative cause

2. Provides an example of the presumed cause without the presumed effect

3. Provides an example of the presumed effect without the presumed cause.

I don't understand why/how 3 would weaken the argument, unless we are also assuming that if A causes B, then A is the ONLY thing that would cause B (i.e. A is necessary for B)

Can someone elaborate on this?

Also, on "most seriously weaken" questions, is it correct to think there will really be only one answer choice that weakens the argument? I am asking because of questions 21, section 1, on PT 79. Both answer choice A and E weaken the argumnet (According to the above), but E is clearly better.

Sorry to be melodramatic, but all of life is hopeless and I want to die. Just kidding, at least about the dying part, but I need some advice about to what to do.

I just walked away from PT 79 (SPOILER, I'm going to discuss the order of the sections) in the middle of the RC section - which is usually my best section. I didn't feel like the RC section or the LR section before it was any more difficult than any other PT, but I just felt like my mind was in a haze. I was moving much slower than usual and felt like I wasn't comprehending what I was reading.

Some background - I went to bed early last night, slept well, got up early, exercised, ate breakfast, had coffee, warmed up with half of a LR section and 2 easy Logic Games. I felt confident - I really felt like this was the day I would get a 170. I have done well (for me) on my last 5 PT with an average of 164.8 (166,166,167,162,163). I took a timed, proctored PT 73 last Saturday under test-day conditions and I didn't do as well as I had been doing (163). This damaged my confidence some, but I attributed the score to nerves which caused me to choke on the LG section. But that's always my worst section. I normally get -2/-3 on RC and LR and today I felt like I was choking on those!

So, what do I do? Don't say postpone. I know it's good advice, but my situation is different than most of you and I have to take the test on Saturday. I'm taking advantage of the University of Oklahoma's "early entry" program and I need a score to finish my application. I can retake in Feb and even June for scholarship purposes, and my lowest score is still in the top 25% for OU. Do I take a day or two off? Is this just regular burnout or something else?

I was averaging -2/-3 on PTs in the 30s/40s. I jumped to PTs in the 70s and am now averaging -10/-11. HOW DO I FIX THIS!? Its very discouraging :(

Hi!

Will all the explanations for PT 79 be available on this website sometime this week (i.e. before December 3rd)? Unfortunately I missed the BR session with JY.

Thanks

The correct answer is B. However, I originally selected A because this answer seems to be linked to the premise following the conclusion. Answer A incorporated the information that came after since, which is a premise indicator.

Can someone please explain why A is wrong?

Can someone explain what may be the best method to avoid choosing the incorrect answer again with similar stems?

I always have looked for premise indicators because they are very important when selecting the correct answers. I do not want to be fooled again.

Please assist.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-june-2007-section-3-question-17

Does anyone know how the alternative scantron accommodation is carried out? If an alternative bubble sheet is provided, how does it differ from the ones that non-accommodated test takers use and is there one available for download?

Hi everyone,

Upcoming Dec test taker here. A question about stray marks on the answer sheet has troubled me recently.

If I fill in the whole circle, and broader than the circle itself (so it covers the bubble entirely), but not to the extend that the mark touches the edge of bubbles of other answer choices, would that count as a stray mark and thus not admitted?

I originally thought that they only scan answers within the circle and thus as long as no other answers have anything in it, while one answer has everything filled, it will be fine; but I recently read an example of stray mark that worried me. (If someone hand score it, it may appear apparent which answer the test taker chose)

For example, on the right, question 7 and 25, if there is only 1 answer, the one on the right, filled for each question, will it still be a correct mark?

http://www.iitianspace.com/images/OMR-filling-guidline.pdf

Can someone explain the science of OMR and how are machines processed?

Much appreciated!

Hi everyone. One theme I've noticed in JY's videos, is that he'll identify a bunch of not both or either or rules, and then chose one to put on the chart. LSAT 36/Sec4/Game1 is an example. He puts the either or, but not the not both rule on the chart. How do we know when/which to put on? Thanks!

Thanks for your thoughts.

What is the first sentence?

I thought this is the conclusion because it says "undeniably"...

and all the rest are premise :(