Centaurs and Unicorns. The Parallel Flaw question from the underworld.

Wednesday, November 11th at 8PM ET: PT52

DON’T FORGET TO CLICK THIS LINK: https://join.skype.com/w7McAagFN3pf

IF YOU DON’T CLICK THIS LINK YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE BR GROUP

Note:

Does anyone know if you can purchase the Edit Once option twice, as in once for a resume and once for a personal statement??

Hi! I'm in Stamford, CT, about 40 min from NYC and wanted to see if there was anyone in the area that is also studying for the June 2025 LSAT! Let me know - thank you!!

Passing down all of my LSAT books, including The LSAT Trainer, The Loophole, Powerscore LSAT Bibles, and the 5lb Manhattan Prep book, other LSAT Manhattan Prep books (Reading Comprehension & Logical Reasoning). Prefer pickup in New York—please message me for more details.

I hit a wall early in my prep. I logged every wrong answer religiously in the notes section. But after a month, I realized I wasn't learning; I was just hoarding my failures in a list I never wanted to look at again.

I was spending hours managing data when I should have been fixing the underlying logic flaws and rewiring my old ways of thinking. I realized that re-reading the same question wasn't helping—I was just remembering the answer, not learning the rule.

The inefficiency was driving me crazy. About 70% of my journal was stuff I had already learned from, but it was buried in with the difficult concepts I still needed to work on. I was wasting an hour a day reviewing a massive wall of text just to find the few questions that actually mattered.

I eventually built a tool to fix the workflow. It filters out what I already know and uses AI to verify I actually know the pattern of the difficult ones by generating new variations. If I got it right, it schedules review for longer. If I get it wrong, it shortens the review period so I can focus on the questions that trip me up most. I went from a 157 to a 173 in a few months, and I really think it's because I used this as a "hyper efficient" wrong answer journal to find the signal in the noise.

Does anyone else have a good system for "pruning" their wrong answer journal? Or do you just let the list grow forever, or skip out on using it entirely?

Hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas!!!!

Talk to your heart’s content at Group BR

LSATurday, Dec. 26th at 8PM ET: PT32

Click here to join this conversation: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/239503069

EVERYBODY GETS A GOTOMEETING! YAY!!!

June BR Group Schedule: http://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/6171/june-test-takers-group-br-schedule-updated

I’ll be there for a while. :) Hope to see you there!

Please click the link and comment if you plan on participating.

Note:

Please message me for more info if you'd like to join and you've not already received the info in your inbox. :)

If there's a 5/5 difficulty question that I get correct on my first try, should I make an effort to go over and identify/rule out the trap answers? I guess in a way I must have done that in my original answering. I worry that going over them more might make me more confused when my intuition/reasoning was right the first time. Thoughts? Is it worth doing to carry over?

Absolutely clueless on this one. I've probably watched the video 5 times, and I just don't see how B weakens the argument that is in the passage. Also, can someone look at my reasoning for A?

Win democratic elections not fully subsidized--->poor candidates supported by rich. As a result, it could be true that the poor candidates will compromise their positions to win the rich guy's support. However, the proportion of rich people in all of the political parties is the same as their proportion in the population. Thus, the belief that it could be true that poor candidates will compromise their position to win the rich people's support is wrong.

What I am looking for: The premise doesn't support the conclusion at all since we don't know whether being proportionally equal nullifies the pressure to conform to the rich guy's opinion. For example, say that rich people are 1% of the population in all political parties; they must then be 1% of the total population. It might be reasonable to say that the rich don't have that big of an influence on policy. Now, what if the proportion was 99%? The rich might have a huge say in policy! Thus, the premise could go both ways in either providing support for the conclusion or not.

Answer A: This is what I chose, but I still am very unsure why it is wrong. I think the argument does fail to address this answer choice. Maybe it is wrong because of the word "primary?" I'm not so sure though since we are usually supposed to accept the answer choices as true. If it is the case that the "primary" function of a party still may not negate the influence of wealth, then doesn't this paraphrase the flaw very well? To me, this is hinting at the idea that the proportion of the wealthy might be so high (or so influential) in political parties that it doesn't matter which one the poor candidate choose, they will have to conform to the wealthy point of view's party.

Say that the word "primary" is the reason why this is wrong (which I am not really sure why it would be), what if this answer choice said "a function of political parties...?" Would it be correct then?

Answer B: Like I said earlier, I just don't see how this weakens the argument. I do think it weakens an argument, just not the one in the passage. Here is my breakdown of this answer choice: say the poor candidate believes, "Every person who takes the LSAT should get a 180 and full ride to Yale" but the Democrats and Republicans both think "absolutely not" (the positions of the parties is way less varied than the position of the candidate). Then sure, joining a political party would compromise the poor candidate's views. But, that isn't the argument in the passage. The argument is that the "possibility of a poor candidate compromising his views to win the support OF THE RICH [not the political party] is not true." How are these two the same argument? In other words, if this is true, isn't the LSAT equivocating between the views of the "political parties" and the views of the "wealthy patrons?"

Answer C: We don't care about government subsidized elections.

Answer D: We don't care about wealthy candidates.

Answer E: We don't care about other flaws.

Wondering if anybody on here has just taken the Sept 2017 LSAT in Australia? It is different from the US version and hoping to gain any insight into the experimental sections/any general thoughts you had !

I had 3 LR so i know that my LG and RC were real.

From what i can remember:

LG1: One layer sequencing game

Had a Condition that M-W.

R either first or 6th

LG2: Something with artefacts

LG3:[completely skipped as pressed for time]

LG4: Double layer sequencing game

Buildings being erected either Upper or Lower (Buildings FGHI)

RC:

-reading about kente woven fabric

-reading about whether chemistry and physics are linked

-reading about law systems in UK and technology

Any info about how many questions were in each of your LRs would be super helpful!

Thanks :))))

I'm an idiot. I registered for the LSAT prior to the deadline for November. It asked for a photo and I just uploaded a selfie from a while ago because it was perfect - plain photo background, no shadows, etc. I began to read the requirements and I think I'm screwed. For starters, I lost about 25 pounds since then. Secondly, I shaved my beard about 3 weeks ago so it's not as full. Genuinely worried that my test is not even going to happen because I was being stupid and wasn't thinking carefully. The anxiety is officially through the roof. Not sure what to do.

Hi I'm planning to take the LSAT Oct 2022 or later and was wondering if anyone else who's not planning to take the LSAT anytime soon wanted to form a study group

The answer should be D, as the other answers all call for too much. There is no apparent need for real strength. 'To be believed' is the key phrase.

Hello, I am currently scoring 161 and have tried to join study groups in the past but unfortunately, they have become inactive or study at different times than I do. I study in the evenings east coast time starting at 4 pm ET to nighttime. Is there anyone else who would like to study together in the evenings and keep each other accountable? We could do it over zoom, discord or even WhatsApp. If anyone is interested, please DM me.

Do you guys scan the answers or just jump right in and try out games?

I realize this is very game dependent. I usually scan the answers choices quickly, but if nothing jumps out I force myself to jump right into trying out all the answers. I found myself wasting time on open ended game boards trying to think about why an answer choice could be correct, and coming up with nothing for all my "thinking" time. So know I try to just jump right into testing the answers.

Today I came across a game, LSAT 10, Game 4 http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-10-section-2-game-4/, that has me rethinking my strategy. I didn't make the inference at the start that Y must be in, though I DID make the difference that at least one of X/Z must be out. When I got to question 23, I quickly looked at my master game board didn't come up with any that must be in, so just jumped right in to trying out the possibilities. I got through A and B, before scanning the remainder of the choices and quickly realized that Y must be in.

The game took way too long in general, not just because of this question, but still interested in how you guys handle "thinking" about correct answer choices, or just jumping in and trying possibilities.

WV resident looking for someone to meet up with to study in person occasionally. Located in north central WV but willing to meet up within a reasonable driving distance.

Currently about 2 months into pretty relaxed studying but looking to create more structure/accountability.

If this sounds interesting reach out whenever!

I am confused by question 8. I was down to C and E, ultimately chose E, but only due to pure luck.

I don't know why C is supported but E is not.

The potential support for C is in line 23, where it says "one problem in studying the effects of drilling waste discharges..." But it just says there is a problem in studying. It doesn't say that the study is done. Perhaps the study wasn't done due to the problem. Who knows? Another potential support is just the whole second and third paragraphs of Passage B. They tell us that WBM is less harmful than OBM to the environment. That potentially implies that a study was done?

The potential support for E is in line 32, where it says that Drilling mud is normally released during the drilling phase of a well's existence. We know that the mud is discharged, although we don't know if it is continuously discharged into the sea.

To me, C and E both have weak support. I don't know why C is more supported than E.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-1-passage-2-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-1-passage-2-questions/

Anybody shoot June, 2014?

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

Join Bailey and Rahela as they examine the implications of a simple but powerful fact: for every LSAT question, there’s only one right answer hiding among four wrong ones. Learn how recognizing this dynamic can transform the way you evaluate choices and increase your accuracy.

Hi, is there a way to stop my keyboard from popping up and attempting to type anytime I attempt to highlight or just click on the stimulus accidentally?

Hi,

I've seen a few message boards concerning group chats. However, it's not clear whether these message boards are translating to real groups being formed. I'll offer to start a discord group for anybody that is aiming to take the LSAT in September and or October, as I am.

My user is @dcforrapii

Send me a message, and I'll start it up :)

Just looking for people to study with and keep each other accountable with studying. Think it could be helpful to get feedback and input from other people and whatnot. Message me if you're interested

Hi everyone,

My average PT score right now is 168.5 (highest was a 175) with my recent scores in the 169-173 range; my BRs are consistently in the low-mid 170s. My GPA is 3.79 (it's lower than my actual GPA cuz I went to a quarter-system school: kill me).

I have not started writing any essays and I want to apply this fall. Is it worth it to get any kind of admissions consulting? I'm paying out of pocket and there are so many free resources available, so I'm doubting the value of paid consulting. But I also want to produce the best possible application. What do y'all think?

Secondly, I would love to study for the September/October with some peers based in the Bay or the Pacific Time Zone. If you live around the Fremont or Milpitas area, let me know and we can study in-person at a library or coffee shop. If not, I'm happy to use Zoom!

Thanks in advance!

Hi,

I'm pretty set on putting in applications for this application cycle, but know there is a possibility I would want to defer or re-apply during a later cycle so that I can continue to pursue other goals. I'm wondering how declining admission to a school (T14) would impact a later application. I have heard that declining admission if you got off the waitlist looks very bad. Are deferrals ever granted for 2+ years? How soon after receiving an admissions offer does one have to make their decision?

Thank you.

https://discord.gg/U5vKrBD5