Discussions

All posts

New post

348 posts in the last 30 days

Anyone find much success limiting (at least at the outset) what you write down during a Logic Game to the second page? My last few games have really improved in time since employing this strategy. I find i write smaller and I refer back to the rules more because they are within my line of sight for almost all of the logic game. It turns out, at least for me, that the LSAC wasn't doing us a favor by changing from one page to 2 pages.

0

I am thoroughly confused by this question.

The correct answer just explains why TI remains ordinary. But why does that even need an explanation?

I thought the discrepancy is why TI is more popular than M despite TI being ordinary. Hence, wouldn’t the correct answer have to strengthen the mitigating reason for why TI is more popular?

The premise only talks about how TI’s location attracks customers, but it doesn’t address if that makes TI more popular than M. So I was looking for an answer that would suggest that the location is a significant factor in determining TI’s popularity, significant enough to render its ordinary food less relevant.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-82-section-4-question-21/

0

7Sage Website Gods,

I love being able to take the PT1-35 LG sections timed and then easily check answers after BRing them by clicking on Resources > Logic Game Explanations.

I would love to be able to do the same thing as I work on LR sections from those same tests. I have the questions already, but to find answers, I have to "score" a PT for the relevant test, then find the question explanation links, then afterwards delete the "scored" PT from my history so it doesn't throw off my analytics.

Any chance you could add a page that would only be visible based on your membership level, and that is formatted like the LG Explanations page, but for LR questions?

If such a resource already exists, or there is an easier way than my current solution, and I just haven't found it, could you point me in the right direction?

Many thanks,

-Joe

0

In substitution questions, the part that says "would have the same effect in determining the order..." means what? I am having a hard time putting it into my own words? From my understanding, given the explanations for the questions in that the substitutions can not knock and old rule out of the new world nor can it sneak new rules into the old world? So, "have the same effect.." means that the "world" itself goes unchanged?

Kind of like when a business goes under new management. The only thing that changes is the person in the management position, the business itself stays the same because the policies, guidelines, procedures, etc. (aka the rules) are still the same. The new manager still has to follow the rules of the business. The new manager can not change any of the rules by getting rid of old ones or creating new ones because changing the rules will change the business and that's not what the new manager was hired for. The new manager was hired to follow the rules and uphold the business, not change it.

This is my understanding. Can anyone comprehend this explanation of the theory of substitution on the LSAT?

Please feel free to share your understandings of substitution as well!

0

Hi all,

Looking for some input on which PTs to prioritize. I have access up to PT59 via 7Sage and also have a few in the late 60’s/early 70’s through a friend that come with Kaplan written explanations. I know the most recent ones are more reflective of the actual test, but I feel like I learn better from 7sage’s explanations.

What would y’all recommend? I plan to go through the other group in timed sections/drilling regardless but trying to decide which to focus on for my final 5 full-length PTs.

Thanks in advance!

0

I wanted to see the reason why I got rid of B and D is correct.

B ) "The qualities enabling a person to be elected to public office" -

Descriptively incorrect. The premise never said her past antinuclear record is the quality that enabled her to be elected?

D) "It leads to the further but unacceptable conclusion that any project favored by major smith should be sanctioned simply on the basis of her having spoken out in favor of it"

Descriptively incorrect. Premise did say we should build the nuclear plant not because Mayor smith favored it but because Mayor Smith "who supported antinuclear record" favored it.

Admin note: edited title

0
User Avatar
•

Thursday, Apr 11, 2019

618792

LOCI Swap?

Tis that time of year! Anyone want to swap LOCI? Let's show those adcomms just how excited and well-informed we are!

0

So I just registered for the September 2019 LSAT on BYU's campus. I'm trying to find out where on campus the test is actually administered, but I can't find anything. Is that something that I won't be able to find out until I can print my admission ticket? Any information is appreciated! Thanks!

0

Hi guys! So I spent the summer working through the 7Sage lesson prep and now am at the stage where I just drill PT's and review them. BUT I am a junior in college who is majoring in Finance and a minor in Econ aka a lot of course load. I also am in a frat and want to join an extra finance club but any suggestions on time management? I am thinking about definitely taking a test every friday and reviewing it sat/sunday. Then taking another test on like monday but taking the tuesday-thursday to review it (i.e. in between my classes and when I have a spare hour) granted there will be weeks that I can't get both tests in can I just get advice from anyone else who has had success balancing work/school with LSAT studying? BTW I am taking the LSAT in February of 2014. Any advice would help!!

0

I find that in some strengthen/weaken questions, the right answers are some "other consideration" that influence the conclusion, but are irrelevant to premise. Consider this weaken question:

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-3-question-06/

This phenomenon is also common in "shield" type of NA question. The answers are something that is not talked in the stimulus.

In these case, can we say that, we are not strengthen/weaken the support that premise giving to conclusion, but strengthen/weaken the conclusion independently?

0

Do we blind review every section? So basically review all of our circled questions, maybe even re-read the reading comp passages at a slower pace to confirm answer choices etc.? We basically can review the whole test at a slow untimed pace? THEN check our answers?

Also for full length PT's do you blind review the same day you took it or the day after? What do you think is more useful? Obviously when I am doing section drilling I will BR immediately after.

Any advice would be awesome! Thanks!!!!!

0

Does anyone have an example for this? Don't even know how to start a second LOCI. Do I reference my first LOCI in it? Any advice would be appreciated on how to even frame such a letter. I am waitlisted at my top school and recently found out about a program very unique to this school that I believe would be helpful to my career. Would mentioning it now (in a second letter) be odd? I don't want to come off like I didn't do my research before but the info on this program was just not where I was looking before.

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?