So this was a very interesting question. We are asked to identify the necessary assumption in the argument of the citizens group. Citizen group argues that the mayor have more than the town's economic interest in mind. Why? the citizens give the answer that the mayor didn't go with what they think is the BETTER option: building a park. Comparing to the highway, the citizens believe that the park will attract TWICE as much business.

What is the problem here? Well, how do we know that just because the mayor didn't go with what the citizens think as the best option, he's in bed with the highway construction company? There might be other concerns that the mayor considers other than just maxing out the business that plainsville can attract, such as pollution brought by making a business park by cutting down trees, land shortages, etc.. These can definitely make the highway more attractive to the mayor than the business park, leading the mayor to think the best option for the economy is the highway. More importantly, the mayor can just simply be unaware of the idea of the business park. He simply did not consider that option, and when the citizen group roasts him for it, he's like damn you're right let's build a park. The citizen group, therefore, has to assume that the mayor has considered the park, knows about its advantages over the highway, and think it is economically more ideal to build a park than to build a highway to make the conclusion that the mayor is interested in more than pure economic gain for the city.

The necessary assumption therefore should be something like: the mayor recognizes that the park is a better option for the economy and can attract more business. Exactly what answer B catches. The mayor has to accept that the park is economically a superior option to the highway. If he doesn't, he can genuinely think that the highway helps the most, with all other things considered (beyond the scope of this question.)

Let's talk about other answers:

A: This doesn't help. Simply beyond what we need to consider here. The citizen group doesn't have to assume that there is already a highway to argue that the mayor is acting sketchy. I don't even see what this answer choice is trying to do. Saying that the highway is important and we don't have it yet so we need one?

C: We don't need this. The highway not having other benefits does not affect the argument of the citizen group, and the OTHER benefits of the highway is not in the debate between citizens and the mayor. There can well be other benefits from the highway, and the park can still be twice as more beneficial.

D : No idea what tax revenue and approval have to do with the question.

E: I chose this one, thinking hey if the only way to help the economy is to build the park, and the mayor is not building the park, he must have something to hide, right? No. If this question is a strengthening question, this AC could work, but it is not required. The citizens do agree that the highway is bringing SOME economic benefits, implied by the statement that the park can bring twice as much business. Therefore, the citizens don't think that the ONLY way to help with the economy is to build a new park. They don't have to think this to be the case to reach the conclusion that the mayor has other interest in mind. Keep in mind: the citizen's argument is not that the mayor is not helping the economy at all but that he has other interests. This answer choice is too extreme for it to be necessary.

I took the lsat a few months ago and was stumped by what should’ve been an easy game. I know I spotted a similar type when I studied it last year, but I can’t find it for the life of me rn even though I’ve scoured 90 games.

It’s a variation on a one layer sequencing game with variable blocks.

So imagine rule 1 is sth like A is either immediately in front of B or C bnb. Which is pretty simple and straightforward. But then the rest of the rules are basically a similar series of 2-3 other “either or, bnb” variable blocks, which is where it can get confusing. I just know I got super confused and stumped navigating this and would like to find the similar game I recalled so I can familiarize myself with the format.

I always find it tough to intuitively decide whether to do a general map and let it be question driven vs solve for all gameboards. often when I get confused by a question I freak out and then end up trying to solve for all gameboards late into the game, eating up time. Can anyone point me to similar games?

#help

What the title says. I've been studying for the LSAT for a while now, and frankly LR is the only section that seems to utterly piss me off. I can do analytical reasoning and reading comprehension just fine (the only time I get mad on those is when the highlighter feature is being overly-sensitive, but I've learned how it works) but when I do the games, I flat out want to scream and throw things when things stop making sense.

I'm not really someone who deals with anxiety on the LSAT as I often hear others have. For me, it's frustration and anger. I took the August LSAT and I nearly blew a gasket in the middle of the logic games sections.

I think I need to study more, get the fundamentals down more, and overall just expose myself to more difficult problems with a cool mindset. This is really holding me back. I was going to take a practice test today but decided against it so I could focus more on the games in a casual setting without the timer.

Any advice? This test is a challenge of our patience, too, as you all know. Thanks.

I was one of the people whose exam begun and then crashed afterwards in the middle of it.

If you haven't yet:

Submit an Official Compliant ("connectivity issues AND press cancel score, NOT keep score)

Give a brief description

Submit

They will contact you in 2 to 3 days about rescheduling. She also said after you can contact proctoru to schedule tomorrow or Tuesday if slots are available. Regardless, the scores will be out by October 27 either way!!!

She had also said that the 21st is def one of the days for rescheduling, but they are probably gonna have more options due to the velocity of people whose test crashed during the exam. I wanted to tell you guys because I have tried emailing, calling, trying via proctoru and got not helpful response. I hope this helps you!

I am scheduled for tomorrow, but it looks like LSAC is a mess today :/. Has anyone even been able to finish the whole test without issues? Any advice for Sunday test takers?

Also sorry to everyone that has had issues with the exam, I know it must have been extremely frustrating. I hope y'all are able to get through to LSAC soon!

Anybody living in London and want to study together for the LSAT? I'm scoring mid/high 160s aiming to get into the 170s. I'm hoping to take the exam in January of next year.

Hello! I'm currently studying for the January test. As of right now, it is pretty hard to attend certain groups because of my work schedule. I work overnight and I am only available after 9 PM EST on Tuesday, Thursday and Sundays. If anybody is available to meet up and work together, that would be great. Send a message if interested.

Would love to get as much feedback as possible :)

The question itself is rather easy - (D) is pretty clearly something the argument is assuming, and necessarily so. Negating it makes a mockery of the argument.

However, I did spend quite a bit of time on this one, because I've always learned that "most" answers are virtually never correct on necessary assumption questions, because negating a "most" statement just takes you from 51% (or more) to 50% (or less), so negating a "most" assumption does virtually nothing to the argument. I'm hoping someone can clarify the guidance on "most" statements on necessary assumption questions. Thanks in advance!

Did anybody buy prep plus alongside the monthly $69? Just curious if I need it or not. Thanks.

(D) is clearly correct, but I'm having trouble articulating why (C) doesn't work. Here is my articulation:

At its core I think it comes down to a necessary vs. sufficient concept. Not like "C is sufficient but not necessary" but like this: the stimulus is saying that in order to help a patient heal, the psychotherapist MUST focus on positive change in relationships. The negation of (C) would be "there are at least some patients who will not find relief by changing their relationships." BUT the stimulus wasn't saying "if the psychotherapist focuses on positive change, the patient will be helped," it was saying "focusing on positive change is necessary in order to help." So it doesn't kill the argument to say "there are some cases where positive change didn't help a patient."

Maybe that isn't as muddled as I thought but any input would be helpful. Thanks!

I am writing this to make sure I have it right, if not please correct me. When it comes to weakening questions, you are supposed to attack the premise. For strengthening, you are supposed to attack the support. Right? I was going through one of the lessons on strengthening and got confused from the lesson on weakening questions.

SIKE.

STOP dat (insert caps plus x100 exclamation points)

Let's just motha fcking do dis sht!! In da name of psilocybin trips and the vast celestial intergalactic constellation formations let's js bus it and dust this off. 180 ain't shit - I'm taking this Blink 182 style baby!!

If so, did you do early decision, were you above, at, or below the avg GPA and LSAT?

Hi!

Is there a timer on the screen? Are you able toe easily see how much time you have left?

Hi All,

I was wondering if anyone knows if they'd be allowed to mute the LSAT on test day so that one can speak what they are reading out-loud. I find out-loud reading to be more dramatic for me personally and allows me to focus better (kind of like touching the words with your mouse or pencil).

Thanks in advance on the input and discussion.

I was doing well on practice LSATs and was scoring in the mid 150's (couple weeks ago I got a 155) until I took a recent practice LSAT and scored a 145. My blind reviews at at a consistent 165 so I know what I am doing but I'm not sure what went wrong with this recent LSAT. Does anyone have any study advice on concerning a large score drop?

Hi all,

I have taken 3 practice tests in the last 2 months and I have gotten the same score on all three. Is there any advice on how to break this plateau? Some strategies I can implement in order to increase my score 5-10 points. Any advice is appreciated!

In June, I had a clear glass cup of water that I was told to get rid of. What is an acceptable way of having water available during the test?!

good luck to everyone else taking the Oct test, we got this (3(/p)

It's funny how the most logic-centered exam organization made the most illogical decision to rescind students exam just because LSAC mistakenly thought that students are putting in the wrong test locations. I am currently in the states and have taken the June LSAT flex without any problem but yesterday I received an email telling me because I did not reply to their audit email asking me to confirm my address, my OCT exam is cancelled.

I have taken the LSAT twice: June 2021 and August 2021. Both were 163. I was scoring well above (low 170s) before the most recent one. Obviously, the test day penalty is severe. But how can I overcome this? I recently hit a -0 LR, which I am ecstatic at accomplishing, especially given I have not dipped below -0 on LG in a long time on PTs.

Studies show that maintaining meditation is helpful, but I haven't been doing that consistently. Is there any internal motivation I could possibly engender in myself before test day in an effective way?

Hey everyone,

I'm taking the LSAT for the first (and hopefully last) time this Sunday. My goal is to score at least a 171, which I've done on 6 of the last 7 PTs I took. I took my last PT today and am planning to only do some light drilling tomorrow and the day after. I'm curious if anybody who's taken the test before can give some advice about how to ensure you do as well on game day as you have been in your PTs. I think it's important I stay confident and don't put too much pressure on things, but I'd be happy to hear any advice y'all have for ensuring you score to the best of your ability.

Thanks in advance for any insights and good luck to everyone taking October!

Can somebody clarify for me the distinction between B and E for Question 20? Aren’t the two choices basically saying the same thing? The only difference being that B specifies that both are flying their respective planes. The rule states that “no plane flies without a qualified pilot aboard,” but doesn’t indicate they need to be flying the plane. Similarly, E states that Cindy is in plane 2, therefore sufficiently satisfying the rule’s requirement. So, what’s the difference here? How do you choose between the two?

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-3-section-1-game-4/

Everytime I take a PT, I'm always like that one was barely a 155-160, but the vast majority of the time its 165+ lmao.

How is A correct? Can someone provide textual support.

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