Economic growth -> Increase agri (+ keep biodiversity) -> abandon conventional agri

Conclusion Econo growth -> abandon conventional agri/modify agri

SA?

A. Increase biodiversity -> /Increase agri

Increase agri -> Reduce biodiversity this is not what the stimulus is saying so non sequitur.

B. This would place biodiversity back in the loop and make it relevant by connecting the pieces of the structure

C. But this is alr listed in the stimulus

D. We dont know this

E. Modify agri -> increase agri this flips the lawgic

Taking the August test. Last week I was finishing up the modules and I was flying through them and I felt like I could understand the test like Neo at the end of the Matrix. Then starting this week I have tried to study and I feel like all of that is out the window. In some aspects its like last week never happened and I feel like I'm back to square one. I was told I might be burned out but I don't feel like that at all, I felt really good but then it disappeared. Help me get that feeling back cause it will take me to the promised land!

Hello everyone,

If you’re waiting to hear back from other schools, how do you go about seat deposits?

I know I can’t rush a school’s decision, so would I just put a seat deposit down until I hear back from the other schools?

I have not seen MP questions that begin with a question at the beginning before this one. I got it incorrect since I put B thinking the conclusion came after the word "Certainly" I am not sure how to get to the conclusion in this stimilus.

Hello! Would anyone be down to take LR drills and review them together over Zoom?

Hello everyone! I’ve been improving on my reading ability on the RC section and have been absorbing and understanding the information much better in my drills. I find that my problem are the harder questions. Like I understand the passage well but the complex questions throw me off. Idk if that makes sense but does anyone have any tips on how to counter this?

Hey everyone! There's lots of big study groups out there but I'm searching for a consistent nightly study partner to finish out the grind to the August test. Currently PTing upper 160s and looking to break 170s. I work full time so study at night only around 7-10 PM EST and weekends. Message me if interested!

I just took a diagnostic after 6 months of having taken one (no studying in between). I am now ready to start studying with a consistent schedule and take the September Test. The problem is that my diagnostic score 6 months ago which included the LG section was significantly higher than my score from today, which I did without LG. Should I register for the June LSAT and try to study these next 5 weeks (mastering LG) and take it with the LG section, or should I just forget about LG and take it in Sept as the updated test version and take my time partaking on the other sections?

I am very new to practicing for the writing sample, so I have some questions that might seem like common sense to other people. I'm sorry.

I notice sometimes that when I'm arguing for a particular choice I catch myself wanting to fill in gaps with stated assumptions that are necessary for my point to logically follow. However, sometimes these include outside information or things that are not stated in the prompt. For example, one of the writing sample prompts from an older prep test stated two options for filling in the gaps in a shop owner's inventory: either adding a line of metalwork items from a regional artists consortium, or becoming the sole representative for the artwork in the estate of a deceased painter. This painter lived most of his life in the area but the majority of his works were painted elsewhere. One of the criteria is that the shop owner wants to specialize in locally produced artwork. I was wondering as I wrote if the line of metalwork from the regional artists consortium meant artwork made by regional artists producing in the region. In other words, as I was writing, I was assuming that the line of metalwork was made locally. In these occasions, even if I do not know for sure, should I clarify that that they were made locally?

Another question that I have is about including not just the facts in the prompt, but also considerations to support my arguments. Of course, I know I have to use the facts, but in addition to the facts, can I also write about considerations? For example, in the same practice essay I was writing about how the choice of adding the line of metalwork would help the shop owner fulfill her goal of attracting new customers, since sustainable art is in trend among environmentally conscious art collectors, but such a consideration is not a fact. I am assuming the truth that materials such as metal are more ecologically friendly compared to oil and paper, for example. But, then again, I am making the assumption that the paintings were not watercolors... Then I caught myself thinking that I'm also making the assumption here that the scraps of metal were responsibly disposed of and no mercury or other toxic metals were used. My common sense says most probably not or the artists would also be dead, but anyway, these thoughts still intrude as I write. I need some guidance, or maybe someone to smack me over the head.

What LGs, preferably in/out games, are good for practicing embedded conditional statements and dealing with them when they pop up?

Need someone to keep me accountable for the next two months. Want a study partner to just study in silence with. We don't necessarily need to be studying the same things, but it would help to have similar goals/workloads to keep each other motivated. I have taken the LSAT twice in 2022 and scored a 167 in November. I have stopped studying for a couple months now and hope to pick things up to get a mid 170. I am currently in school but is generally free all days except Tuesday and Thursdays, and I aim to devote ~50 hours a week to study. Add me on discord xtt#8183 if interested!

....Hi I know there is an addendum that we can explain everything what happened during gap years, but unofficially would many gap years + withdrawals from classes be frowned upon?

My GPA is around 3.6 and I am not even sure if I can dream of T10 with these on and off situations...

Hi all! I have created a discord for 2023-24 applicants in order for us to have discussions, review essays, and be positive sources for one another. I know not everyone has someone that is going through this process and understands, so I hope this provides that space! Feel free to join, assign some school roles, and say hey. :) https://discord.gg/Bm47a62W

A lot of people who were part of the 170+ were able to reliably get -0 on the logic games section which gave them more room to make mistakes in the other sections. Someone could get -4 RC, -4 LR, and -0 LG and still get a 170. But now, with the section that people could reliably get -0 on removed, how will amount of questions needed to be correct to get to 170 change? Will the curve be more forgiving now that LG, the typical -0 section is gone, and the other sections that are less predictable and have more opportunities to make mistakes (especially RC) are still here?

Took a drill today and noticed the drilling setup has seemingly changed. Has the feature been removed that allows one to click the x to the right of an AC to eliminate?

I'm from Europe and planning on taking LSAT in October or November

For this question, I chose E in the first round but switched to B in the blind review. I thought B would be a safer choice since the word "criticism"/"criticized" is used by both Murray and Jane. If Murray does not think it is wrong for politicians to accept gifts from lobbyists, why would they assume other politicians should have been criticized? Could someone please explain to me why B is not correct?

I had this question right initially but doubted myself and switched the answer during the blind review.

Hello, I am currently PTing around 165, I am working to get into the 170's by September. I am looking for a study buddy, mostly for silent study sessions/body doubling. I will typically study in the evenings and weekends because of my job. Let me know if you're interested.

Hi all,

I’m sorry about all the discussion topic posts! When you finish the CC, which PT you recommend starting with? I plan to take the LSAT post-Logic Games so would it have to be the first PT in the reorganized edition?

Hi Everyone!

I just completed the Logic Games lessons and now I'm ready to start drilling. I was wondering, how do you all approach drilling? Personally, I'm planning to do four games per day. Here's my routine: I tackle one drill, take a short break, and then watch the explanation. After that, I move on to the second drill, take another break, and watch the explanation. At the end of the day, I revisit both drills.

By the way, I have set the difficulty level of the drills to medium. Do you think that's the right level, or would you recommend a different difficulty?

Just want to share my thoughts and notes:

This formula right here: independence -> progress doesn’t warrant that more independence = more progress, so E is incorrect.

Cultures -> needs independence to replace dependence (natives replace outside imposition) -> progress.

A. anticipated answer choice

B. Staff and students are digging too deep, we’re only looking at cultures as a whole

C. Tailor is too details, not needed

D. Must is g2 so Advance -> prevent outsiders, not really align with the lawgic above.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

Correct: A

Incorrect: C

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-53-section-1-question-09/

"C" is incorrect because the male population could've stayed the same and the decline of the female population made it equal to the male population. "A" is correct because "proportional" gives relation to the whole population. It is saying that the decline of the female population is a decline in the total population. This takes it from being 2/3 of just females to 2/3 of the species.

PT16.S3.12 – Retina Scanners

This argument deals with retina scanners, machines that scan the blood vessel patterns in people’s eyes and stores these patterns, such that the scanners can recognized previously scanned patterns. The author furthermore posits that no two eyes have identical blood pattern vessels in their retinas, which seems to suggest that any given person has at least two such patterns, one for the left eye and one for the right one. The author then infers the conclusion that “[a] retina scanner can therefore be used successfully to determine for any person whether it has ever scanned a retina of that person before.”

We are supposed to identify a necessary assumption for this argument, i.e. an assumption that must be true for the conclusion to follow from the premises. Under timed conditions, I chose (B), which posits that everyone’s left and right eyes have identical patterns. I took this to be necessary for the conclusion to follow, due to conclusion’s scope (the conclusion is about “for any PERSON who ever had a retina scanned,” not about “for any given RETINA that ever has been scanned”). However, (B) seems to be false, for at least two reasons: (1) (B) goes against the information we get in the stimulus, where we are explicitly told that no two retinas have identical patterns. (2) (B) does not seem necessary for the rest of the claim that the conclusion seeks to establish (“Retina scanners allow you to answer the question, has one of the this person’s retinas ever been scanned?”). To make (B) a necessary condition, the conclusion would have to say something like “Even if you only scanned one of this person’s two retinas beforehand but not the other, retina scanners allow you to determine whether either of this person’s retinas has ever been scanned before.” However, (B) is not necessary for the way the conclusion is actually stated; the conclusion never says that the evidence to consider for any given person is a scan of only one of their retinas, as opposed to two.

The right answer choice (A) avoids this mistake by blocking another possible objection: What if people’s retina patterns change over time? Wouldn’t this make it impossible to recognize past scans later on, contrary to the argument’s conclusion suggests? (A) blocks this possible objection by establishing: Even if people get e.g. eye sicknesses, the patterns in their retinas remain unchanged over time.

.