http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-32-section-1-question-20/

This question asks which of following answer choice will strength the conclusion EXCEPT.

The conclusion is that the current map used to show where different types of garden plants will flourish is more useful than the older map.

b is irrelevant because modern station can be over 60 years old as long as the data gathered from them are not 60-year-old!

However I cannot see how does D supports the conclusion? It is assuming the more and better weather data you have, the more likely you can get accurate weather pattern to predict the growth patterns?

Anyone in Pearland TX for prepping together.

Help! I don't know where to begin. I narrowed it down to A and C.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-3-question-15/

I am having trouble figuring out the hard LR questions. I want to be able to eliminate all the answers that I know are wrong, so I can leave the correct answer. Any tips?!? I hope I have made sense.

Hi,

Used both firefox and chrome and same issue on both.

The alternate video player works for the first time I open the page, but if I click outside the page (which makes it close) and reload the video by clicking the link for alternate video, it won't show up. A blank popup appears instead.

Am I doing something wrong? I hate using youtube because it loads slowly compared to the alternative player.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-31-section-2-question-21/

This is a parallel flaw question.

Original flaw logic structure:

P1: Bank deposited credited on the same date if it is before 3 pm

P2: Alicia knows the deposit before 3 pm

C: Alicia knows the the bank deposit is dated on the same date

To simplify:

P1: A leads to B

P2: someone knows A

C: someone also knows B

Flaw: need a sufficient assumption to cover that gap, someone also knows that A leads to B.

Answer choices:

C. G knows he will be promoted, because G will be promoted if H resigns and G knows H resigns.

(Perfect. It is unclear if G knows he will be promoted if H resigns)

E. P wants to become a social worker. It is well-known social workers are poorly paid thus Pat apparently want to be poorly paid.

(It is unclear if P knows being a social worker will lead to poorly paid)

Or is it because it is asking for similar logic structure, there is a difference between "know" and "want".

If so look at section 1 q22. What was you answer?

Okay i'm not really sure what to title my concern but unlike LG which I can do a few times and understand 100% wth I was doing wrong, I am having trouble doing something like that for LR.

When I go over the right answers by watching the video for the PT I can see what I did wrong. I try to "redo" the question by trying to convince myself why the wrong answers are wrong.

However I'm still making like 5-10 mistakes in LR per PT.

This is a pseudo-sufficient assumption question.

P:All leaders in major parities oppose the bill

C:The bill will most likely fail to pass.

Target answer to connect no support with fail to pass.

Answer Choice Analysis:

A. Most bills that have not been supported by even one leader of a major party have not been passed into law

E. Most bills that have been passed into law are supported by at least one leader of a major party.

Isn't E the contrapositive of A?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-30-section-2-question-21/

Hello,

I have a bit of a dilemma.

Okay, I lied: a huge dilemma.

I was hoping to be ready for the October LSAT, but I am by no means prepared. I want to apply for the 2014 school year, so I have to have my application in by November. I would very much like to study in Toronto and not have to move away from home. I have a mediocre score on my file (155, I think) from last year. I'm only about a quarter of the way through the course. Would it be a disadvantage to apply and indicate that I'm writing my LSAT in December? I'm worried about being pushed to the bottom of the pile based on my score. My GPA is decent, I have an undergrad degree in forensic anthropology but I'm a bit terrified. I don't want to try and cram from here on in and waste money. And have another shitty score on my file. Or loose any possible chance I have of being accepted.

Any words of wisdom?

This game was terribly difficult for me, but after spending quite a bit of time thinking about it, I think I've figured out what surely has to be the best way to set this game up. The game seems confusing because it pretends to have 5 game pieces (the five cities) which are connected to each other. The epiphany I had was that those really aren't the game pieces: the CONNECTIONS between the cities are the game pieces, and it's really just a 9 piece in-out game. The 9 pieces are the 9 unique permutations of the 5 cities' connections. Boo-ya! -Do people still say that?

Anyway, I wondered if anyone else had thoughts on this game, or if there is a reason why this set up/approach to the game isn't the absolute best.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-40-section-2-game-3/

Which PTs are considered difficult and which ones are (relatively) easy?

I took PT 46 yesterday after upgrading my course from the basic package to premium and I got -4 LR, -0 LG, and -1 RC. On PT 50 I got annihilated on LR (improved to -7 LR, -2LG, -1 RC from -14 LR..). PT 51 was "in between" 50 and 46 because I did better in LR than I did on PT 50 but not as well as I did on PT 46 (-6 LR).

So I understand that logic games now are on two pages to give more room to write out diagrams. This is great. How are you guys incorporating it into your practice though, just an extra sheet of paper? Also if they are two pages do you know if they are always on pages facing each other, so you can see both when the test book is open? Or is it possible that I'll have to flip pages to get from the first page to the second?

For JY and other who teach 7sage lsat prep:

What did you guys score on the actual LSAT? What was your diagnostic score when you started?

Can someone explain what role "even if" plays in (D)?

I was able to eliminate all of them except (D) so I picked it. Turns out, I got lucky.

I tried to make even if a sufficient condition so "even if" it fails, the necessary could still happen. However, is this correct way of thinking about it? Or is even if similar to only if?

On a side note I only got one wrong on PT 51 S1 :D

Not sure if this LR section was easier or if I got better :P

Edit: can we also go over Q16? I had trouble doing the diagram for it but managed to get it right.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-51-section-1-question-21/

Breathe in breathe out!!!! Are my new fav words when I am trying to read and people keep talking to me though they see me reading ugh

Today I have a big progress in weaken/strengthen question.

I find in most weaken/strengthen question, there exists a presumption and the only thing answer choice do is to give an example to answer the assumption in the stimulus "it is the case, it could be possible"(strengthen) or "it is not the case.(weaken)"

For example, in PT37 S2 Q20

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-37-section-2-question-20/

We an see choice A talks about the horses, which at first glance is irrelevant to the stimulus argument cuz stimulus talks about the Antarctic seals. But this choice answer to the presumption in the stimulus "yes it could be possible"(animal can store oxygenated blood in their spleens)

For instance, in PT 52 S3 Q19

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-52-section-3-question-19/

We can see choice A mentions"large mammals", which also seems to be irrelevant to the argument cuz the stimulus talks about dinosaurs, however, choice A answer to the assumption in stimulus(any animals dead in contorted position cuz they eat poison food) "it is not always the case".

Also, in PT 52 S1 Q21.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-52-section-1-question-21/

Choice C talks about modern writer, which again seems to be out of scope cuz stimulus talks about Homer, but it rebut the presumption in the stimulus"any work has such a difference can't be the same author."

For all three questions here, including numerous strengthen/weaken questions, I think the trap here is at first glance it seems to be irrelevant and you may eliminate them quickly. However, for strengthen/weaken question, we can have those example or similar parallel to answer the presumption in the stimulus, which seems at first not perfect enough. That's strengthen/weaken question you don't need to make a perfect argument or destroy an argument.

Hope helps.

Any comments ? Any thoughts ?

They seem far simpler than the newer ones.

The newer tests have a ton of abstract language (or so it seems to me) than older tests.

If you were going to do a bunch of PTs where would you start?

Anyone willing to help, through PM's or something?

This is a very basic question but I plan on applying to schools this year so I can start attending next fall.

I've tried to gather some information online but each minute I spend on something else is a minute not spent on the LSAT! :<

So far I've gathered that I need to send my transcript to LSAC, get LORs from professors, and take the LSAT and do well on it.

However, how do you actually apply to a school? Is it just online forms you fill out for each school or is it all done through the LSAC site? Do I ask my professors to write an LOR and send it to me (awkward) or do I have to give them stamped envelopes to send to each school?

I don't know how to exactly ask this without embarrassing myself but I really don't want to screw up law school admissions lol. Thanks.

An artwork cannot express an emotion that the artwork's creator is incapable of experiencing.

How to translate this sentence into logical condition?

If artwork's creator incapable of experiencing, then artwork cannot express an emotion.

Am I right?

Which word is the logical indicator in this sentence?

I thought cannot is the indicator means group 2. Am I right?

Many thanks!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-51-section-3-question-19/

You can look at the stimulus in this link.

I believe Jon's explanation for B is wrong because an editor may modernize spelling without providing an explanation, for instance, if similar modernizing has been done in more than one quotation, then you can modernize them just inserting a general statement in the preface.

I know why D is right, but still don't know why B is wrong.

Can anyone help me clarify it?

After going through all the courses in 7sage, I found myself still confused about causation and conditional logical, especially how to know the relationship in stimulus is causation, condition, or premise and conclusion. Anyone can help me clarify it?

Is there a way to refresh what the course shows as already been completed? I extended my schedule and want to go through the whole course again, but what Iv already done a while ago still shows as completed.

Hi,

I've currently only taken 2 PT's (50, June 2007). I purchased some LSAT question bundles from cambridge lsat and drilled a bunch of LG and RC from tests 1-38. After each topic JY taught, I would spend about 2-3 hours doing drills from those packets.

I'm thinking of taking every other 50s test and then doing each 60-68 test.

Is this a good plan?

On PT 50 I screwed up hard on LR but after calming down my nerves and "retaking" the LR section I improved substantially. I have heaps to go though before I can say I am confident in my abilities to score 0 wrong (or as few wrong as possible). I did okay on the other sections but as mentioned in another post I ran out of time on the RC but got one wrong while missing two on LG because I didn't read my own inference chart properly...