I’m gradually grasping several crucial concepts and developing my intuition. Even when I make mistakes, I identify my errors and comprehend the concepts well and in less time.

However, I’m having a large problem: I’m unsure whether it’s more advantageous to read the stimulus first or the question stem. I’ve seen varying opinions, with some suggesting that reading the stimulus first is better, while others promote the opposite approach. What do you guys do, and what are the benefits of doing that approach for you?

When should someone begin to focus on their time during drills in addition to accuracy

Anyone be interested in participating for sake of questions, motivation, advice, etc?

I am ideally going to test for the first time in June. Getting to the point in my studying where I’m taking PT’s and feel I have no one to chat about them with.

I took my diagnostic in January. Since then I have studied a little and taken two more PTs. While I have been reviewing my wrong answers I haven't really been committed to studying since I am taking the summer to do so for the August test. I took a PT each month just to build a stamina but was surprised when I jumped up 6 points on the second and then 6 more on the third. I am having some imposter syndrome since I haven't studied the way I should be to getting those jumps. Is this random luck? Was my diagnostic just lower than I was capable of? Is this normal for beginners?

I am consistently getting 80% when I select for highest difficulty level on MC questions. Is it worth continuing to focus only on MC questions, or should I move on to other topics? Not sure what the ideal strategy is.

Looking for a study group in DC.

Hello everyone!! Does anyone have any information on taking the international LSAT? Is it the same exam and does it look ok on law school applications?

I am thinking about moving abroad for a year before attending law school (a life long dream of mine), however I'm worried about taking the LSAT and if taking the international test is a good idea? From my understanding if you're not psychically in the US or Canada you can't take the regular exam and need to register for one of the specified international dates, so this would be my only option if I chose to go. This is probably a niche question, but any insight would be helpful. Thank you!!

Help I am having trouble dealing with both conditions…the sufficient condition and the necessary condition in the pasaje of MBT, MSS & MBF. When I go to look for an answer I get confused because I always see extreme language like “only if, always & others”. And those anwears only benefit the neccesary part so I end up discarting them. In the blind reviews I even get them wrong. Do you guys have any recomendations? I think Im looking for the ideal anwear & I know its not present.

Admin note: Edited title. Please do not post threads or comments in all caps. This is against the Forum Rules. Thanks!

Looking for someone studying in the Northern VA area that is willing to meet up every Saturday/Sunday to go over questions. I'm in the mid 170s to high 170s looking to perfect my approach by explaining questions to other folks. Please dm if you're interested and I will make a discord.

Hey all! I have recently joined the course and I finished the Grammar section in the syllabus today. I am wondering if this is a good time to start doing the drills or should I wait till I finish all of the foundations sections? Thanks and happy studying!

Curious if folks at this point are having issues scheduling their April test? For days, I’ve been having “No Available Times” and LSAC has told me to reach out to Prometric who hasn’t gotten back to my request from the “Contact Us” page. Bueller?

I'm struggling to figure out a way to take an entire PT section, 1-25, without taking the entire Practice Test. Does someone know how to filter it this way? I found an older post detailing it but I think the formatting of this website must've changed as I couldn't follow along

Hi! I have been drilling a bit and took a couple PTs, which have been in the 140s-mid 140s. I bought 7sage in hopes to go over the whole curriculum and really get the fundamentals down. I am hoping to get together with someone (or some people) where we can hold each other accountable and possibly meet on discord or something to review questions and PTs. I just feel like verbalizing each question and our mindset can really help us make improvement. My BR is 20 points higher than my actual PT score, so I feel like I get it, but need to practice consistently.

Little about me: I'm in PST, work, and take evening classes. Once my classes end in mid-May, I'll be able to devote my evenings to the LSAT where we can just drill/review a bunch of questions.

Please reach out to me!! My rule of thumb is that there are no dumb questions. We are learning this test together :)

Edit: Send me a friend request on discord so we can get something going!! My username is swaggerjagger02

Edit #2: THANKS SO MUCH FOR THE SUPPORT EVERYONE!!!!! Please add me on discord so we can get the ball rolling!!!

Hello, Im trying to review the quantifiers section in the Logic of Intersection set. I want to know the difference between the quiantity of each word. I remember I once saw a video here with a scale explaining the Number each word represents. Can someone Point me to that Lesson? Thank you in Advance!

7Sage will be temporarily unavailable while we upgrade our services.

Eastern Time: 6:30am Friday, March 28

Pacific Time: 3:30am Friday, March 28

The site will be available again in two hours, hopefully less.

If you were affected by the recent outage from 12:10am to 2pm ET on March 27th, we are very sorry for that. This was due to an issue with a third-party service provider. This scheduled maintenance will prevent that from happening again.

Please avoid doing a PrepTest or Problem Set near this time so that your work is not interrupted. Sorry for any inconvenience!

Like in lesson 5 why can you not conclude that the conclusion could be morally right by using the contrapositive?

Hi Everyone!

I've been studying for the LSAT for 3 months now, and I plan on taking the test in April. I'm looking for someone open to studying every morning for a couple of hours on weekdays! My first PT score was 138, and my most recent PTs are in the mid-60s (so if you're scoring in the 60s as well, that'd be perfect). I'm very open to studying together via Zoom so if anyone would be interested, please inbox me!

I went from a 150 to 161! Will be testing in June. Goal score is 172, so we are halfway there! I'm based in San Diego if anyone on the West Coast wants to be study buddies or do accountability checks.

Trying to find some Boston area LSAT camaraderie!

I hope this is a good space to share this, if not please let me know. 😅

I was looking for California LSAT study groups to hold myself accountable on studying or finding support spaces where we can do drills and PTs and go over them.

There's probably other groups out there, but just wanted to share this group in hopes of finding active people who are working towards the June 2025 LSAT and beyond.

💙 Those working 9-5 jobs are welcomed.

💙 All LSAT score levels welcomed.

Because this group is new, our first meeting will be Monday at 7:30PM (PST) on Zoom,

but anyone is welcomed to join and create Discord events with the time they want. 💙

https://discord.gg/eq7QSHKQnn

Thank you!

Hello, I'm taking the June 2025 test and wanting to make a study group. Let me know if you are interested.

Anyone Bay Area folks taking the test in June iterested in a discord?

I took the lsat for the first time and got a 136.. super sad

Currenly I have around -6 on LR section under time constraint, but after BR I can get to around -2. I realized the mistakes I can easily fixed and most time even marked is when I encounter MBT or Parrallel questions types which uses formal logic and for me requires diagraming as I am not used to formal logic yet.

I understand maybe to improve the speed on these questions requires time and practice but I also realize when I translate them into formal logic, they start to look like math to me and the meaning is lost. I do get the question right but I am worried with that my intuition will never get trained and I always have to waste time to translate those into math & diagram to get them correct, which might result in not finishing the section.

So my question is just on how I should practice those questions? Should I continue to diagram out each time, and my intuition will actaully grow with it? Or should I start trying out diagraming out in my head and apply more meaning to it? Would it faster for some people to actually diagram out during the actual exam?

Thank you for answering in advance.

An example in this post is from a live class so it MAY BE A SPOILER****

Hi! I am continuously running into issues with conclusions regarding sufficiency and necessity. I completely understand the structure of Lawgic, and I can chain conditionals with no issues using Lawgic, my issue is when sufficiency and necessity lead to a conclusion, and I cannot conclude the argument is valid or draw a conclusion. I can write it out correctly, I just don't understand what it really means..

Example:

Exercise 2: Evaluating Argument Validity

Is the following argument valid?

The vote to grant Chancellor Palpatine emergency powers will not pass if Senator Amidala delivers her speech. Amidala cannot deliver her speech unless the attempt to assassinate her fails. Her assassins planted a bomb on her starship but unbeknownst to them, she was not on the ship when the explosive detonated. Therefore, the vote to grant the Chancellor emergency powers will not pass.

The argument is not valid because of the Lawgic: (I have the structure down)

SAS → /P

SAS → AAF

AAF

/P

Where I am getting confused is the explanation that is provided: "Satisfying a necessary condition yields no valid conclusions." So when can we yield a valid conclusion?? What condition should I be looking at to conclude whether an argument is valid or not?

Another example:

Biologist: We know the following things about plant X. Specimens with fuzzy seeds always have long stems but never have white flowers. Specimens with curled leaves always have white flowers, and specimens with thorny seedpods always have curled leaves. A specimen of plant X in my garden has a long stem and curled leaves.

Q: From the biologist's statements, which one of the following can be properly inferred about the specimen of plant X in the biologist's garden?

I have all of the Lawgic correctly written down:

fuzzy seeds-> long stems

fuzzy seeds -> /white flowers

curled -> white flowers

thorny seedpods -> curled leaves

x has a long stem and curled leaves

The answer: it has white flowers but lacks fuzzy seeds.

HOW??

I understand it has white flowers, but how is it not "It has white flowers and thorny seedpods."

Is it because if there are curled leaves, then there are white flowers (curled leaves -> white flowers), the fact that having curled leaves is in the sufficient means that white flowers has to follow?

And thorny-> curled means nothing because curled is not in the sufficient?

If something is satisfied in the necessary, you can't conclude anything from that?

I have literally spent HOURS trying to understand this (and understanding other examples further down LR). I don't want to move past chaining conditionals until I can completely understand this, so I'm stuck in my studying. I'm actually struggling so hard. Also is it clear what I'm getting confused on... ?? I can re-edit if this is too all over the place sorry :(