Hi - I’m looking for a study group/partner in Los Angeles. After the awful September test, I’m looking to retake in November. I’d like to get together in person or online to review pts and go over strategies. On average, I score around 165 and am looking to improve lr and reading speed. My strongest section is lg. Send me a dm if interested.

Hiyo! Looking for a study buddy in the NE Ohio area. I'll be taking in June. E-mail me at bluesmurf13@gmail.com if you're down. Thanks much!

Proctors: They were friendly. Did their job well in keeping everybody separated by one chair between each test taker and verified materials that were brought into the room.

Facilities: Test Center was located off campus in a small strip mall in a small building owned by the school. Clean and comfortable but kind of chilly. Take a sweater.

What kind of room: it was a big open room with various long tables as opposed to desks. There were about 5 test takers at each table with a chair in between each.

How many in the room: I think there were about 25 people

Desks: None, just long tables.

Left handed accommodations: Not sure what this means but, ok,sure.

Parking: ample parking.

Time elapsed from arrival to test: about 20 minutes

Irregularities or mishaps: I initially thought the test was on campus so I was wandering around campus looking for the test center. When I finally arrived to the testing center, they said it was off campus. I was almost late. Another thing that happened was that some guy showed up without a passport photo. He wanted to leave to go get a picture as required and they would not let him because he would have been late. He was unable to test that day.

Would you test here again?: no, I took my LSAT the first time here and the second time I went about a half hour further to get to another testing center. I'll review that one later.

Date of Exam: June 2015

Flaw Question-- calling all folks who are a beast at LR:) HELP?

I understand that the answer is C but I want to make sure that I'm breaking down the argument correctly:

*Best way to understand --> Direct Empathy (that's what some psychologists claim, and we're supposing they're right)

*/Direct Empathy ("since it's impossible to gain a direct and complete grasp of another person's motivations" aka Direct Empathy-- I believe this is what the author takes as the truth)

THUS, no way at all to understand (already problem here, it should have been THUS, "no best way to understand" rather than "no way at all to understand")

But that's not even the main conclusion...

*Understand ("One can understand other people"-- again, this is what the author takes as the truth)

THUS, the psychologists' claim is wrong-- it's wrong to state that (best way to understand --> Direct Empathy)

The problem is that the author cannot state that the psychologists' claim is wrong because the author's evidence is flawed--- assumes there's no way when the psychologists are only talking about best way.

However, I'd like to go deeper into this question and modify it-- what if the author correctly said it was "best way to understand" as opposed to "no way at all to understand"-- would the argument be valid then??

*Best way to understand --> Direct Empathy (that's what some psychologists claim, and we're supposing they're right)

*/Direct Empathy ("since it's impossible to gain a direct and complete grasp of another person's motivations" aka Direct Empathy-- I believe this is what the author takes as the truth)

THUS, there's no best way to understand

*Best way to understand (my modified premise-- "But there is a best way to understand people")

THUS, the psychologists' claim is wrong-- it's wrong to state that (best way to understand -> Direct Empathy)

In this case, is the argument's conclusion valid? It's TRUE that the psychologists' claim is wrong because ultimately what we have is... we know it's true that /Direct Empathy & there is best way to understand ... so we can't validly get to "Best way to understand --> Direct Empathy"

(Am I thinking correctly? lol)

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-2-question-11/

Hey all!

I am pretty sure I understand what JY means but I have never encountered a question where it is okay to independently strengthen a hypothesis without strengthening the support between premises and conclusion.

In JY's explanation for PT 89.S2.Q3 he talks about the question stem and mentions how some (rare) strengthening Q's will say "what most strengthens the hypothesis" (as oppose to "what most strengthens the support between for the hypothesis",) in which case, he says it is okay to pick an answer that doesn't necessarily make the premises more relevant but could be something random that just makes the hypothesis more likely to be true.

I was wondering if anyone knows of any examples of a question like this from a PT? I would like to see it just to ensure my understanding is clear.

Thanks so much and good luck to everyone taking the Jan-Flex!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-89-section-2-question-03/

I'm fairly new to 7Sage, but I am curious to know others' thoughts on this. Should I keep doing problem sets in a specific category if I am getting them right every time? Even without blind review? Not trying to brag or anything here, just genuinely curious of what others are doing.

I got back my Nov LSAT score and was not too thrilled with it. I was scoring much higher on my prep tests. I am torn between applying anyways to select schools and seeing what happens vs. studying more for the LSAT and applying next cycle. Any advice on what to do? Also, how do schools view reapplications- if you get rejected the first cycle, but apply regardless in the next? Thank you!

Hello, could anyone provide an explanation for general theory? I have seen it pop up several times in MoR question and in other questions as well. I know its a principle that is know in the world like "everyone should eat healthy" but cannot come up with one that does not include should. Anyone have a better understanding of it?

Hi,

I am currently getting mid 150+ and am taking the January exam in 10+ days. My goal for this exam is 160. (Ultimately aiming for 167-170 by May).

Every time I do the digital preptest and BR, I get at least 12-15+ correct question difference.

I am wondering if the difference is majorly because one's on digital and the other is on digital/paper.

I do would like those differences to be reflected on my actual preptest.

Any suggestion?

Looking to start or join a study group with regular weekly drill sessions and BR days. Currently scoring in the high 150s low160s hoping to break into the 170s by April. Let me know if you're interested!

Hey guys,

Hope you all did well on December LSAT. Is anyone thinking about applying to Fordham or has already applied? I heard mixed reviews about acceptances and was wondering if anyone has some insight.

Thanks!

Proctors: Very familiar with the procedure and strictly following them.

Facilities: Restrooms are close by and everything is clean and perfect.

What kind of room: Medium-sized lecture rooms.

How many in the room: 50 - 80

Desks: Long desks, more than enough space to spread out your stuff

Left-handed accommodation: Yes

Noise levels: Minimum

Parking: Ample parking in front of the building.

Time elapsed from arrival to test: Everyone was lined up in the first floor lobby first (testing rooms are on the second floor) and got assigned a piece of paper. If you arrive at 8:25 or later, you probably will have to be escorted to the testing rooms. The test started at around 9:30.

Irregularities or mishaps: Once during the test I heard a car alarm go off for about 15 seconds.

Other comments: The test center is at Hofstra Law School. People there are familiar with the test and the testing conditions are ideal. This place is just quiet throughout. The proctors can be very strict.

Would you take the test here again? Absolutely!

Date[s] of Exam[s]: 2014 Sept, 2015 Oct.

What do you guys think of this approach?

Hey all! I am really stuck in trying to figure out how this is used in causation questions. Is there a specific lesson dealing with this notion? Or are the explanations embedded in the causation explanation videos?

Thanks!

I had a few questions dealing with addendas that I was hoping to get input on. A few weeks ago I did tune in for the webinar on addendas and learned alot about content for each topic, so my questions deal nothing with content or length.

My main question is this: how many addendas should you provide? I want to add a diversity statement for sure, but for example, if I felt that I needed to address a shortcoming in my application or LSAT score that will be beneficial to my application and not be redundant, can I have two?

Also, how do I format them?

Should I use a simple title in bold letters? Should I use fancier format options or keep it simple? Font? Size? Anything related to addendas are foreign to me, sorry if these questions seem pointless. Also! For personal statement essays do I add a title or just jump into the essay right off the bat?

Is it a good idea to use the BR method for non-timed pts? I like to work on older pts such as 30 to 50 slowly while Im at work or If I need to drill and keep my mind sharp and to make it a habit to not forget anything.

Im using 51 to present pts for my actual timed pts while I study for the October exam so Im not concerned with wasting pts.

Hey there,

I'm looking for a study buddy or two. I don't plan to take the LSAT until August (If the world resumes by then). Unless I improve faster than I expect. With the COVID virus going around, I've found it harder to be motivated to study when I'm trapped in my house. That, and I learn better in groups---having the opportunity to explain my reasoning to someone else, ask questions, share tips and etc. really keeps me grounded.

I'd be happy to hop on Zoom, Duo, IG or whatever really.

We could plan to take practice tests together and BR together if you're into that.

Good luck!

Hello-JY mentioned these games are rare. Wondering if there have been any on the more recent administrations of the the LSAT. Thanks

This question is difficult because once you spot the flaw, it is hard to put it into words, which is why I missed it. I couldn't figure out how any of the answer choices paraphrased the flaw, so I had to pick an answer and move on. I don't really see how C is the flaw and how A is worse than C.

Bike riders don't follow the rules of the road, and this is a causal factor in 25% of traffic accidents involving bikes. The lack of bike saftey equipment is also a causal factor in 25% of those accidents. Thus, bikes are partly responsible for more than half of the traffic accidents involving bikes.

What I am looking for: I think the flaw is a math error. The conclusion says that 50+%, but we are given information about a causal factor being 25% and of those accidents a causal factor is 25%. Instead of additive, the relationship should be multiplicative. The conclusion should only talk about the percentage of bike accidents that included inadequate bike saftey equipment.

Answer A: This was the answer I chose, and I don't see how this doesn't adequately point out the flaw. Sure, you need to make an assumption that motorists are a factor in traffic accidents, but how is that not a reasonable assumption that the author overlooked? Additionally, since we conclude that 50+%, this is implying that less than 50% ("less than half") have some other cause. But, since we can't conclude anything about 50+%, this presumption is not justified. I don't see what is wrong with this one.

Answer B: No. We are to take the causal premises as truth.

Answer C: How is this the correct answer choice? Doesn't the conclusion say "at least partially responsible?" Thus, the argument DOES consider the possibility that more than one factor may contribute to a given accident? Additionally, the argument isn't talking about "all/given accidents;" it is limited to accidents involving bikes. How can the flaw be about "given" accidents?

Answer D: We don't need a source.

Answer E: Who cares about the severity of injury?

Hi,

this was a weird LR question that I thought somebody might have some insight on. I used Process of Elimination to find that E was the only possible right answer, but I was not completely sure how E was the right answer when it stated that the Student's criteria was "inconsistent" with "the principle the historian advanced".

For something to be inconsistent with something else, they must contradict each other. The principle the Historian brings up is that "Alexander the Great should not be judged by appeal to current notions of justice". However, the student only stated that, in order to tell if Alexander the Great raised contemporary standards, one would need to "invoke standards other than those of his own culture". This criteria does not HAVE to contradict the principle the Historian brings up because "standards other than those of his own culture" might or might not include "current notions of justice".

Can anybody explain how E is right here?

Any #help would be appreciated!

i didnt show both sides of the scrap paper to the camera. the program did not instruct me to. anyone get in trouble for this???

Hi all. I applied to a school during the first week of September and received a wait list notice today. I'm wondering if I should send a letter of continued interest ASAP, or wait until later on given it is so early in the cycle. Or, if I should do both, one now and another later on if I have not heard anything? Thanks!

I've been away from the forums for a while, hope you're all doing all right. Leave a comment or private message if you would be down to lend me a hand. Thank you, and looking forward to hearing from you.

Hello! I am looking for a study group or buddy! Writing the LSAT in AUG and NOV! if you have an exisisting group I can join or want for form one with me please PM me!

Hello! My 7Sage course is going to expire after the December test day, which is hopefully going to be a permanent situation cause we're all gonna rock the LSAT!

Anyway, I was wondering if "My Notes" also get deleted/cleared when the course expires? Cause I did take a bunch of notes and I was hoping to keep them.

Thanks in advance for your knowledge!