Discussions

All posts

New post

269 posts in the last 30 days

So this is a NA question.

Both options D and E make sense to me, but E is supposed to be the correct answer.

E says "anyone to whom safety is an important factor in purchasing a car will consult an objective source of vehicle safety information before buying"

But what if the consumer believed ads and promos were objective sources of vehicle safety info? If D. was the correct answer it would make sense, because if they were aware that ads weren't objective and they only viewed those, safety probably isn't that important to them.

Maybe safety is their #1 factor but they truly believe ads and promos are objective sources of information. They could just be very unaware and ignorant and believe ads are an objective source.

Let's say health is my number one priority, and I'm drinking these shakes that contained tons of sugar and chemicals because the commercials say they guarantee fat loss. I didn't consult a nutritionist because (for arguments sake I'm just stupid) and I truly wholeheartedly believe the commercials provide an adequate source of information. You really can't say health isn't my number one priority, like you can't say safety isn't their priority. Now if I KNEW the commercials were full of lies and I still drank the shakes anyways, you could say health isn't my number one priority.

Explanation Video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-75-section-3-question-15/

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

0

Hi guys. I know its not recommended to work during law school, but what are you expected to do for living. Like you could stay with parents, but if the law school is hours or miles away how are we expected to pay for living expenses without working? I know some schools its not even allowed for 1L students to work. I will be going to law school straight out of undergrad, so I just need some insight or opinions.

0

I am having problems with Author Inference questions in RC and was wondering if there was a way to practice that rather than practicing only law, humanities, art, or science passages. I find that no matter the topic, I struggle with making inferences so if there was any questions you suggest from any PTs in particular please help and let me know how to best practice this!

0

I am on RC part of 7Sage CC. I get almost all questions correct on questions of difficulty up until four stars. Do questions get significantly harder when the difficulty level is a five stars?

0

I took a couple of LSATs over the weekend with my scores being 157 and 158 respectively. I am set to write the November LSAT and my goal score would be in the 160s. Currently, my strongest section is LG with an average of -1 to -2 on timed games and 0 on longer or untimed. LR and RC tend to fluctuate as under timed conditions, I tend to forego anything type of strategy I have.

Any advice on how to take back control of LR and RC to break into the 160s?

Thank you :)

9

So yea, I feel silly asking such a question lol.

But what does "no" mean in it's function as a response to another person's argument?

For example, in a disagreement question:

Person 1: A, therefore B. (insert whatever you want for A and B. Make the argument valid or invalid, whatever)

Person 2: No. (rest of stimulus).

So, if I were to read all of Person 1's argument, and then only read the "No." from Person 2's argument, how should I interpret that?

Does "no" ONLY mean that B does not follow from A, in which case B could still be true, you just can't arrive @ B from ONLY A?

Does/could "no" mean that there is a simply a disagreement about context and that B actually does follow from A?

I'm only interested in the function of no within the scope of how the LSAT generally uses this word in disagreement questions.

Thanks!

0

Is anyone interested and studying together and hammering out tons of lsat question? I feel like having study partners motivates. Interested in doing it over zoom or if you’re located in LA that works as well.

0

I struggled with this question and I would like some feedback on my thought process:

The conclusion is that widespread, grassroots efforts towards new, stricter controls are unlikely at this time. We know that people generally worry about only the most obvious public health problem. We also know that ozone is very dangerous and that there is a widespread water contamination problem that most people know presents a bigger threat to their community. So here, I said to myself, for the conclusion to be valid, it is not enough to show that most people are aware that water contamination is a bigger threat, it has to tie to the previous idea of people only caring about the most obvious health problem. Accordingly, the water contamination problem must be the more obvious one. In other words, the generalization that people only care about the most obvious health problems explains why most people see water contamination was the bigger threat, and therefore, are unlikely to dedicate efforts to the other, less obvious public health problem - ozone. So I chose C, whereas the correct answer is B.

Where did I go wrong? What's the right way of thinking about this question?

0

Hey everyone,

I had a question about undermining the conclusion of an argument. Does it have to help undermine a premise that is stated because that is how the conclusion is arrived at? Or can it be an entirely new premise? For instance, if the conclusion is that increased energy consumption is bad because we are already too dependent on technology and too many kids are on their phones all the time, and one option said studies conclusively show children aren't on their phones at an unhealthy rate and that technology dependence has replaced drug dependence, would that be the right answer choice since it most directly undermines the premises of the conclusion? Versus another option that says increased energy consumption is bad because global warming is directly affected by energy consumption and our planet is on the verge of falling apart, I feel like that better undermines the conclusion if we are just looking at the conclusion alone. But if it is undermining the specific conclusion that the author came to then I guess the initial choice would be better? This might be a super dumb question I just keep spending way too much time on easy questions because I'm overthinking it.

0

I want to try some practice tests skipping a RC section to see if it would be beneficial to my overall score. I feel like I often get hung up on that one difficult passage. Are there any tricks to determine, without wasting too much time, which passage I should skip and which I should not?

0

Hi! Trying to crowdsource some opinions on this: I have a strong letter of rec on hand from an internship that directly aligns with my future legal career interests. The letter doesn't recommend me for law school specifically and instead recommends me for future endeavors in general. Unfortunately, the internship was two years ago and the letter writer has since gone into retirement. I am having the current intern coordinator upload the letter to LSAC, but am wondering if admissions committees will disregard the letter somewhat if it's not positioned for law school. Basically, should I pull my former boss out of retirement for a bit to update my letter, or is it okay to submit an otherwise strong recommendation?

0

Hello everyone!

Preparing alone for LSAT has been feeling a bit isolating. Was hoping to form a study group or have a study buddy towards preparing for the exam in January 2022-- in the least it keeps us motivated, I would think. My score has been all over the place, ranging from mid 150s to late 160s, and was hoping to get it to be more consistent in the late 160s. Do send me a private message if you're interested. Thank you, and wishing you all the best, future Lawyers. :)

  • SJ

    • 3

    I got down to B and C and do agree with JY that, content wise, both are correct. I see people in the comments and in multiple forums nitpicking at details to try to see why B is incorrect, but I'm just not convinced. What is it about B that makes it an inferior choice to C? I thought both were correct.

    If any admin see this, you don't need to post the link to the explanation video. I already know where it is!

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

    Explanation Video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-89-section-3-passage-3-questions/

    0

    I ultimately chose (C) but was rather uncomfortable trying to eliminate (D). It seems to me they are conceptually similar:

    (C) provides a reason to think there was no "deception" involved - Dr. Faris wasn't deceiving, he knew that improved sleep would likely result from the med.

    (D) also provides a reason to think there was no "deception" involved - with other doctors prescribing this medication to patients who had trouble sleeping, Dr. Faris was less likely to be "deceiving" and more likely to be simply going along with the typical prescriptions he/she has observed from other doctors treating patients who had trouble sleeping.

    I recognize (D) is more of a stretch, which is why I chose (C), but I'm rarely this uncomfortable on a LR question so early in a section, and would love any further insight on how to more confidently dispatch (D).

    Thanks in advance!

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

    0

    Hello everyone,

    I had a question for those who have practiced with the LSAT writing Get Acquainted tool. I was under the impression that with Get Acquainted, they would give you a prompt and you could practice writing an essay about that prompt. However, every time I launch Get Acquainted, it does not give me a prompt to write about... I am a little confused because I wanted to practice with a prompt before doing the real thing.

    Regardless, are there any websites where I can find previous LSAT writing prompts? I just want to familiarize myself with how the prompt will be like before I do the actually writing sample.

    Thanks!

    0

    Hi People who have already completed PT 90-92,

    do any of you want to start a group chat/do a study session to review some questions together?

    0

    Hi, I would like to seek some advice!

    esp if you are focusing on LR/RC without sacrificing your LG performence.

    In my case,

    since my LG has been a relative strength for me (-0 ~ -2, if I doing some LGs everyday),

    so recently I've been mainly focus on drilling LR/RC.

    But I noticed my "game-sense" (logic instinct, fast deduction, etc) became a bit rustier

    and thus will bombed 1 game so ends up -4.

    So what do you do to keep your LG sharp while focusing on LR/RC?

    (I personally found doing drills for all three section impossible given I've a full time job; my study time (1-2 hours every workday) are mostly spend on LR/RC drills)

    Many thanks in advance.

    5

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?