Discussions

All posts

New post

182 posts in the last 30 days

Is it better to take the September LSAT if I want to enroll for the fall of 2015? Or would it matter if I change my test date to the December LSAT? Do schools give all of their scholarship money to their first applicants?

0

Hi

I am currently located at S. Korea. I have just finished the 7Sage CC. I am looking to go through the PowerScore series, Loophole and Trainer. I am looking for anyone to Zoom with me as we do these together. We do not necessarily have to study the same thing. I believe we can work flexibly and just study whatever we want to. Would anyone be down?

0

Hi, I live in North Jersey but also go to NYC a lot so if any girls are interested in a study group in this area let me know. I'm also open to online study sessions to hold each other accountable.

I recently started actually studying and plan on taking the lsat on April.

1

Hi guys,

For question #2, we are asked to break down this argument into premises, conclusion, and context.

The common procedure for determining whether a food additive should be banned from use is to compare its health related benefits with its potential risks. Yellow Dye No. 5, an additive used to color lemon soda, might cause allergic reactions in a few consumers. For most consumers of lemon soda, however, the coloring enhances their enjoyment of the beverage. This particular additive should not be banned, therefore, because its benefits greatly outweigh its risks.

This was my answer:

Context: The common procedure for determining whether a food additive should be banned from use is to compare its [food additive] health related benefits with its potential risks.

Premise: Yellow Dye No. 5, an additive used to color lemon soda, might cause allergic reactions in a few consumers.

Premise: For most consumers of lemon soda, however, the coloring enhances their [most consumers] enjoyment of the beverage.

Premise/Sub Conclusion: because its [Yellow Dye No. 5] benefits greatly outweigh its risks.

Main Conclusion: This particular additive [Yellow Dye No. 5] should not be banned.

J.Y.'s was different. Can people explain to me why my answer is wrong? It makes sense to me since the first two premises explain why the sub conclusion (Yellow Dye No.5 benefits greatly outweigh its risks) which then in turn supports the main conclusion. Thanks!

Admin note: This is the lesson:

http://classic.7sage.com/lesson/quiz-context-identification-1-answers/

0

The video explanation was a bit murky here. I'm not so sure why the answer choice is C. I have a good theory on why people likely mistakenly pick C even though it is the right a/c. There are some issues I have with it.

1. its trying to say that if the number of science and engineering students in university programs has increased in the last 5 years then that is somehow proof or strengthening the idea of there being no shortage of scientist and engineers. This is a problematic shift, it requires us to assume they stay in that program, graduate it, AND work in that field. There is no evidence that these people have even graduated never mind ward off an IMMINENT and CATASTROPHIC shortage. Imminent means about to happen, how can people who entered university 3 years ago and are not even employed ward off and IMMINENT shortage? we don't even know when in the last 5 years this increase happened. We just know generally

2. It is also using a raw number to address a question about a total proportion. In otherwords, the correct answer choice here, C, is a percents and numbers FLAW! It would be like saying ok you have a shortage of 90% of workers. C is saying but you have a significant increase in the NUMBER of science grads, so what, you went from 10,000 to 50,000, that doesn't ward of the IMMINENT AND CATASTROPHIC shortage of 400,000 science grads needed. This matters because shortage means proportion it is a ratio not a raw number. It is the amount of jobs to job seeker ratio. You cannot solve this question with a total number.

3. I try to see how C could at least be right, but I have a real problem with it. I suspect most people don't recognize it as a ratio issue and just say yeah more students ----> more grads -----> -more job seekers ----->avert shortage and therefore Strengthen conclusion. There is a problem at literally everyone of these jumps but the worse one is you can have a significant increase of students, grads, job seekers, and still not avert an IMMINENT and catastrophic shortage. Maybe I am just not seeing where he is trying to strengthen correctly.

4. So which a/c would I have chosen? Probably D? Why, it is the only question who addresses the issue in the argument and thus has the POTENTIAL to strengthen. If certain science fields have an oversupply and others have a shortage. That indicates 2 thins. 1) For the oversupply field clearly there is no imminent and catastrophic shortage, supporting the conclusion. 2) For the shortage field there is also no imminent and catastrophic shortage, it is a shortage but its not described as imminent or catastrophic, so it indeed also supports the conclusion.

0

PT73 BR Tonight at 8pm ET

Well, well, well. About 2 months out and we're gonna BR us some PT73. Needless to say ...

NOTE: We are meeting at 8pm ET tonight. Not 8:30. Latecomers welcome! Gotta give the East Coast folks a break.

Note on all groups

  • For the newbies: Add me on Skype, using handle nikkers625 .

  • For the regulars: Please let me know if you plan to join tonight's session and have not yet been added to the conversation.

  • For everyone: take the PT under timed conditions; BR as you are able; join us for all or part of the call—everyone is welcome.

  • Note: For the purposes of the call, we like to check our group blind review score together at the very end of the call :) So please do not check your answers beforehand :-) Or if you do, just try not to say things like "No, guys, I checked, it's D."

  • These groups work best when folks from ALL stages of prep and with all different goals join in! Not just for "super-preppers" and definitely not just for the casual LSATer (does such a person exist?).

  • PLEASE ... Ask questions !!!! In so doing you are giving others the opportunity to uncover weaknesses in their own understanding, review fundamentals, and ultimately improve their own score. And you're giving yourself the opportunity to do the same. Wow, such harmonious learning experience.

  • The only expectation anyone has for these calls is for you to have fun and ask questions as you desire. We are just a bunch of LSAT lovers who gather via Skype and intellectually slaughter each test.

    • 0

    Hello 7 Sagers. I am a super splitter, who is banking on my essays to seal the deal. That being said, in order to write a strong Why essay for these schools, I would love to get in contact with any current students you all know from the following schools: Stanford, Harvard, UChicago, UC Berkley, UPenn, NYU, Columbia, Yale, Duke, UMich. Thank you in advance. #help

    0

    I know. You're thinking about skipping out on BR groups this week. It's summer, you're having "fun," and October seems so far away. Well, it's not. Don't skip BR groups this week.

    Listen to the GIF!

    Note: Weekday (Weds/Fri) calls now starting at 8PM ET. We haven't had many West Coasters with schedule restraints on recently and would like to give the East Coasters a break (since we've been on until nearly midnight for them recently).

    Please also note: Saturday calls still start at 8PM ET!

    Wednesday, August 5th at 8PM ET: PT59

    Last PT in the 50's!

    (s)Friday, August 7th at 8PM ET: PT74

    Frighteningly recent test.(/s) rescheduled for next Friday.

    LSATurday, August 8th at 8PM ET: PT60

    Did you ever imagine having this much fun on a Saturday night??!

    Note on all groups

  • For the newbies: Add me on Skype, using handle nikkers625 .

  • For the regulars: If for some reason you're not in the group conversation[s] already, just message me on Skype.

  • For everyone: take the PT under timed conditions; BR as you are able; join us for all or part of the call—everyone is welcome.

  • Note: For the purposes of the call, we like to check our group blind review score together at the very end of the call :) So at least don't say ... "No guys, really, it's D, I checked it."

  • These groups work best when folks from ALL stages of prep and with all different goals join in! Not just for "super-preppers" and definitely not just for the casual LSATer (does such a person exist?).

  • The only expectation anyone has for these calls is for you to have fun and ask questions as you desire. We are just a bunch of LSAT lovers who gather via Skype and intellectually slaughter each test.

    • 0

    Thank You 7 Sage Community and to my wonderful 7 Sage study buddies !! I am so blessed to be admitted to UC Hastings Law!! It has been a journey as I was a reapplicant. Never give up and keep on going!

    I plan to visit UC Hastings Law as I am a newbie to the Bay.

    At this stage, should I consider submitting applications to other UC schools? Amongst UC law schools, I only applied to UC Hastings. My goal is to attend an institution in CA, and in-state tuition would be affordable/plus.

    Many thanks and good luck everyone! :)

    0

    I have been reviewing LGs and I am over thinking this I think...

    You know how sometimes we split out game boards and make as many inferences at the beginning as we can?

    When CAN you use those boards to answer questions, and when can you NOT use them (i.e., you would need to draw a new board)?

    I am confused b/c sometimes I split out game boards, and the question reads something like "If J is in 4 then where must H be?", so then I look through my boards and find one where J is in 4 to see where H must go. But then sometimes I get those wrong... Because I did not create a new game board for the question...

    0

    Hi Guys,

    Can you guys please help me take a look if my analysis on B & C is correct? https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-3-question-08/

    The question is very much like a SA question. The answer choices can be quickly eliminated by a match principle into the sufficient condition. However, I think we can expand on this problem more.

    A is correct. So won't go into detail about it.

    B. The sentence is wrong based on 2 reasons. The first reason is by putting the conclusion as the sufficient condition. Even if we were to change the answer into: If election campaigns are to be funded from public funds, it will allow politian to devote less time asking for money than serving the interest of the public, this is still wrong because it is formulated into a C-->P Relationship, while what we are looking for is P-->C relationship.

    C is wrong because it talks of a different set that we do not know. Had this question be translated into an Inference MBT Except question, the asnwer choice then is correct.

    D. is wrong based on 2 counts. The first count is of the same reason as B by messing up the location of the conclusion into the suffcient condition. But in addition to it that the question steam mix in an unrealted element. Evne if we have deleted that related element from the sentence, it is still incorrect and not 50% correct due to the location issue with the conclusion statement.

    If we were to extent this answer choice's analysis a bit further.

    Suppose that in this case, the answer choice for A is wrong too. But D is formulated in the following fashion: "if public funding of some activity produces a benefit to the public but also inevitably a special benefit for specific individuals, the activity should be fully funded by the public while the special interest taker group contributes proportionally more".

    In this answer choice, iff answer choice is made wrong in other fashion. D will be correct on 2 counts. 1) The sentence is 50% correct. Although it do have irrelevant items in it but part of the argument goes through along with our principle. 2) It is the most correct answer in comparison with the rest of the answer choice.

    Had LSAT do this, then the question's difficulty is pushed to a level 4 or 5 difficulty.

    E. is wrong because it like C speaks of another different set of population that is above this univerise. Again, it can become a correct answer choice if it is an MBT Inference Except question.

    0

    A question about early decision - if I apply early decision to a law school and then for various factors I decide I am not going to go to law school at all (very complicated explanation for this but I may end up getting a very lucrative job and not go). What would this mean for me? It cant force me to go to the law school I am assuming.

    I am seeing online "that your required to attend that particular school or not go to law school at all that year" from a blog on power score. But just curious if anyone has more insight

    0

    Here I am, a day before taking my first official LSAT, finding out that I should have applied for Accommodations due to Fibromyalgia.

    Lesson learned; certain rights and privileges are almost useless unless an individual is informed of their ability to exercise said rights and privileges.

    Hoping others who need Accommodations won’t make the same mistake I did.

    2

    Hi all! Just wanted to share this Discord again for anyone that is interested in finding active LSAT Discords. Though we mainly study in Pacific Time Zone, we welcome everyone interested in contributing to the learning community.

    We got a lot of people studying for the upcoming June and August and beyond (but also just starting 7Sage curriculum), so if you are in search of an active group, study buddies, or just have questions about the LSAT, please feel free to join. 💙☺️

    • all LSAT learners welcome!

    • all LSAT scores welcomed!

    • Anyone can create/lead an LSAT study session whenever. Yes, this is a free and open online space to study.

    So far I am grateful for all the support people give to one another on here, and want to share it again in the hopes that more people can benefit from it.

    https://discord.gg/Hb9s8XASad Let me know if the link isn't working (🥲 last time it expired or something)

    Thank you!

    1

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?