I'm currently in NYC (LES), just graduated, and determined to devote my entire summer to studying for the LSATs so I can take the upcoming September 2017 LSAT. I think it would be mutually helpful to BR with someone else!

I have a schedule set up to take every preptest between 36-80. I'm also in the September 2017 study group on Sundays at 7PM. I made my schedule to cater around that one. Please let me know if you're interested!

PT F97.S1.Q18 – Roseville Courthouse

We are asked to identify the point at issue / disagreement between Mayor Tyler and Councillor Simon. Tyler suggested to build a new courthouse for the city of Roseville in 1982 for a price of 26 million dollars, but ‘now’ in 1992 the price of the courthouse is 30 million. Tyler uses these premises to infer that Roseville would have saved 4 million dollars if the courthouse had been built in 1982, as suggested. Tyler also mentions in passing that the existing courthouse has been overcrowded.

Simon responds by bringing in the topic of inflation: The 26 million dollars that the courthouse would have costed in 1982 are equivalent to 37 million in 1992 dollars. Simon takes this to show that Roseville actually saved money by not building the courthouse. Simon also mentions in passing that the courthouse, had it actually been built, would have been underutilized.

There thus are at least two disagreements in this exchange, one much more overt than the other: (1) Roseville was right not to build the courthouse in 1982: Tyler disagrees, Simon agrees. (2) Had the courthouse been built, it would have been put to good use: Tyler agrees, Simon disagrees. The answer choices are tricky in that four of them purport to get at this first disagreement while not actually resolving it. Only one answer choice, the correct one, gets at the second disagreement and actually resolves it:

(A) This gets at Roseville’s actions going forward, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(B) This gets at the issue of inflation adjusted prices, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(C) This gets at the extent of Tyler’s responsibility, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(D) This does get at the second disagreement and points out one issue where Tyler and Simon disagree: Would a new courthouse actually have been needed / been put to good use? Tyler agrees, as Tyler proclaims the present courthouse overcrowded, i.e. insufficient to serve Roseville’s existing population spatially. Simon disagrees; states that a hypothetical larger courthouse would have remained underutilized. The disagreement is subtle, but definitely present.

(E) This confuses the issue of inflation adjustment with financial upkeep, purports to get at the first disagreement but actually misrepresents information from the passage, in an apparent attempt to confuse test takers who did not select one of the previous answers the first time around.

Takeaway: This is a tricky question in that there are two disagreements only one of which gets resolved. The question stem arguably hints at this by speaking of ‘A point of disagreement,’ rather than of ‘The point of disagreement;’ i.e. the question stem leaves open the possibility of multiple disagreements. Nevertheless, this question demands some reflection. Read stimulus and answer choices more than once to get at the nuance of the issues at play. Do process of elimination for the wrong answer choices. If necessary, flag the question the first time around and return to it at the end of the section.

Or can you work in this field without it

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

Are you finding your LSAT review process isn't yielding the results you want? Bailey, Nicole, and ZeSean discuss why simply checking answers isn't sufficient and introduce better approcahes approach to review. They detail essential techniques, including effective error analysis strategies and mastering the Blind Review method, explaining how these transform review from a passive chore into an active, powerful tool for boosting your score.

I am taking the Feb 2016 test and looking for friends to study with!! Let me know if your in the area.

I chose B, and then A, as I was unsure how this claim directly supported the main conclusion...

Just in case you need another prediction

https://forum.powerscore.com/lsat/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8359&p=21376#p21376

Hi,

I'm having a lot of trouble eliminating D on this question, and would love some help if possible! My reasoning:

D) Was the species to which the recently discovered [earlier] dinosaur [X] belonged related to T. rex?

If yes, and T. rex descended from X, this seems to strengthen the author's argument as it suggests that the T. rex features evolved in an earlier ancestor that evidently did not require them for its size. In this scenario the features would have just been passed down to the T. rex, offering an alternate explanation to the scientists' hypothesis and strengthening the author's argument.

If no, and the T. rex and X were unrelated, I feel like this would weaken the author's argument as it would make it difficult to compare the two dinosaurs. Even if X did not evolve these features to support its size, T. rex still may have and it's just a coincidence that they are similar. This would leave us back where we started as the author's evidence for calling the scientists' hypothesis into question is now irrelevant.

Any help clearing this up would be greatly appreciated, I've spent way too long on this question :P

Hey 7Sage,

12 days until the Sept exam, WOOT! I am seeking advice on what PTs to do in the next two weeks. I have already done nearly

all the exams. My only completely untouched exams are old exams -- 39 and 44. Maybe also 10 and 13. Thus, I don't think I should focus on those in the next two weeks, although they are new to me. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I think I want to look at the newest PTs again, since they're nuanced compared to older tests. I have done 70-72 and 75-80 once each. I figure I will do 3 more before the 16th. Should I do 78-80? Does it matter? Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Is there a good method or trick to eliminate all possible worlds for distributions? I just completed a game and couldn't figure out if I exhausted all possible distributions or not. I usually guess for the most part.

thanks.

I need a tutor to improve my LSAT.Thanks !

Hey! Anyone from CSUSM taking the LSAT on Saturday?

I personally find this the hardest LR question in PT 14; it is (1) bizarre on the level of content, (2) very long and overloads test takers with information, and (3) at the very end of the fourth section, thus hitting you at a point of the test where you already spent 2+ hours intensively thinking about stuff and are mentally exhausted.

In paraphrased form, the stimulus says:

(1) Phenomenon: In the Peruvian desert, there are different sets of lines in the sand. These lines occur in different layers: On the top layer, there are lines that branch out from a single point. Beneath that, there are lines that form a bird figure.

(2) Hypothesis: An investigator argues for the conclusion that both of these sets of lines were brought about by aliens, who supposedly used the Peruvian desert to land their space ships. To support this conclusion, the investigator evokes the premises that the lines in the sand would have been useless to Incas.

The first thing to do here is to figure out what the stimulus is even about: The phenomenon itself is not immediately clear – it is crucial to note that there are TWO sets of lines, not just one –, and the investigator’s hypothesis is counterintuitive to a degree that it becomes all too easy to disregard the glaring selective attention fallacy in their reasoning (Aliens or Incas, not Incas; therefore aliens). So the first hurdle here is to even figure out what is going on, and to throw out one’s common sense intuitions out of the window (How can you even identify the different layers of ancient lines in the sand? How did the lines stick around for so long? All of these questions become irrelevant).

The next hurdle then is the question stem, which again seems bizarre: Here, the test writers tell us that we seek to establish the conclusion that the lines are supposed to refer to astronomical phenomena, and that we are supposed to block an alternative hypothesis to the effect that the lines are non-astronomical. So at this point this seems to become a sort of strengthen question. The question stem is unusual to an extent that it becomes hard to pre-phrase or anticipate how a right answer might look like. Thus process of elimination seems to be the best approach:

(A) North American natives arranged stones in ways that allow for the measurement of astronomical phenomena. This seems to strengthen a little bit in that it points out a seemingly analogous case (It is not only in South America but also in North America that people used geological means to keep track of astronomical phenomena). However, it seems unclear how this answer choice would also have the blocking effect that the question stem is asking for. Thus keep around as a candidate but expect that one of the other answer choices might well be better.

(B) The straight lines indicate positions at which astronomical events could have been observed ‘at plausible dates,’ and the bird lines could represent a constellation. This gets at both sets of lines and associates both of them with astronomical phenomena. The answer thus is fairly specific. Furthermore, the answer itself postulates its own plausibility (‘plausible dates’), which seems like a massive hint, though again unusual. Like the rest of this question, (B) thus again seems wildly counterintuitive, but in the scenario we are supposed to explain, (B) arguably makes the most sense. In particular, (B) approximates the desired function more than (A). Thus far this thus is the least bad answer choice.

(C) The lines form patterns. This answer choice is worse than (B), due to its lack of specificity and its apparent disconnect from the question stem. Worst answer choice thus far.

(D) Central American Natives used rocks to measure astronomical phenomena. This answer choice seems almost identical to (A) and thus provides good grounds to dismiss both (A) and (D): There can only be one correct answer choice, two virtually identical answer choices thus are likely to both be false.

(E) The bird lines might be older than the straight lines. Again irrelevant; (B) must be right.

Takeaways: This seems to be a question where the LSAT really tries hard to make test takers focus exclusively on reasoning structures, not on common sense intuition or plausibility. In this sense, the question is similar to other early LR questions that seem weird content wise but make syntactical sense on the level of formal logic. Focus on getting a clear understanding of what is going on in the stimulus and the question stem; I spent four minutes on this and still felt overwhelmed. Get a clear grasp of what the phenomenon is, what the explanation attempt from the stimulus is trying to say, and how the two alternative explanatory directions from the question stem relate to another. Then use process of elimination to get through the answers.

If anyone is in the Arlington/D.C/Alexandria area, let me know if you are looking for an accountability or study partners for the September and November LSAT's.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-3-section-3-passage-1-questions/

I chose D, but the answer is C.

Doesn't the passage talk about theoretician's perspective about the satellites of asteroids?

I don't know why D is wrong.

Can anyone explain me why D is wrong and C is right?

Please help me.

Thanks!

Anyone from Surrey BC/ Vancouver who is looking for a study buddy? Online or in person.

Is there no explanation for this vide? I'm confused why it shows discussion only... :(

I'm starting my PT & BR process now and need someone to BR with specifically for LR. I want someone who is dedicated and will actually show up and be consistent. I am scoring in the low 150's as of now. If you're interested, please message me and we can get started soon as possible.

Hello,

I recently received my CAS evaluation and noticed they included grades from non-undergraduate courses. These courses have no undergraduate standing and were for a certificate course. Does anyone know if non-undergraduate courses are included in the CAS gpa calculation?

Thank you!

I live in the Chicagoland area. I am planning to take the December or February LSAT. I want to pace myself through all the lessons and take one practice test each week. If anyone is interested in studying the same way, I would like to bounce ideas back-n-forth. Skype would be ideal.

Thanks,

NYE8870

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

You only have two chances to take the LSAT: June or October. What do you do if you’re not ready yet?

In this episode, we break down a real scenario from an international student who doesn’t have the flexibility of U.S. test dates. With limited LSAT administrations available, the usual advice—“wait until you’re ready”—gets a lot more complicated.

📌 We cover:

    1. How to approach the LSAT when you only have two test dates

    2. Whether you should take the June exam below your goal score

    3. Why having a “backup test” matters even more internationally

    4. What to do if you’re still in the 150s with a 165 goal

    5. When it might actually make sense to take the test early

    6. If you’re studying part-time, working full-time, or dealing with limited LSAT availability, this episode will help you make the call.

Hey - I'm looking for someone to review problem sets or practice exams. I'm on EST and can review on weekends or weeknights. Please let me know if anyone is interested. My email is Nocera4@tcnj.edu

Hi I am studying for the Dec test and wondering if there's anyone wants to study and discuss questions together. We can meet in a library or the meeting room in my building. My location is close to Bloor&Yonge. Lets study together!

Hello hello!

I took the February test this weekend (yay!), but I ran into some trouble trying to take the argumentative writing section. When I went to take it last week, my Google Chrome gave me a "Privacy Error". I had to call and ask them to reset the section for me! My plan is try it again tomorrow, but I wanted to ask if any other Mac-users experienced the same issue and what you did to get around it.

Thanks!

I missed this one during the timed exam, and I didn't change it during BR since I didn't see how A fully explained the facts.

Over the past five years, the number of car thefts has decreased while the likelihood of someone being convicted of stealing a car has increased.

What I am looking for: What if the technology to catch someone has increased so much that people are deterred from stealing a car and those that do get caught easily/have a lot of evidence against them? What if all of the "good" car thieves have been caught, and just a few really bad/easy to catch car thieves try to steal cars?

Answer A: The first part definitely explains the fact that the number of thefts have decreased: there are fewer thieves. I don't really see how the second part has anything to do with the conviction rate, though. So what if they abandon the car later? What does that have to do with conviction? Not sure about the LSAT's logic with this one...

Answer B: I picked this originally, but when I read it during BR, I really didn't like it all that much. Since I still didn't like A, I kept this during BR. The car alarm idea might explain the lack of car thefts superficially, but if people ignore them, why are there fewer thefts? The thieves probably wouldn't be dissuaded.

Answer C: This might make the situation weirder. If police resources are not used on car thefts, then how has the conviction rate increased? Wouldn't thieves try to steal more cars often if the police don't spend their time on such crimes?

Answer D: This also makes the situation weirder. This suggests that stealing cars is very profitable, so why would there be a decrease in the number of thefts?

Answer E: It's hard to see how there being more young car thieves helps explain the idea that car thefts have decreased in frequency. Also, the fact that they are given short sentences suggests that they will come right out and steal cars again.