189 posts in the last 30 days
Hi guys,
I'm making my way through the Core Curriculum and need people to study and discuss these concepts with. Currently on Logic of Intersecting Sets / almost done with the Foundations section.
153 Diagnostic, looking for a 170+ final LSAT score in June 2025.
If there are sherpas willing to guide, or others in the same boat, please hit me up!
Trying to make this a consistent group meeting 1-2x a week so we can tackle this thing together and achieve our goals.
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.
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!
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 took the lsat for the first time and got a 136.. super sad
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
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.
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!
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!
Hey all,
Looking to take the June test - was looking to see if others were interested in a 4-10 person study group. Let me know and ill make a discord or something and respond.
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.
Hello, I'm taking the June 2025 test and wanting to make a study group. Let me know if you are interested.
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. 💙
Thank you!
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 :(
Super vague question but how do you recommend to study for reading comprehension? I get like 16 problems wrong each time. I just always feel way too rushed to comprehend the text. I've got a good understanding of LR but lost of where to start with RC.
I keep seeing posts on making study group for the DMV area, but no one ever creates one. So I just did. Here's the telegram group link:
or you can search the group by just writing LSATDC
Let's keep this group to students that are studying for the April/June tests only please. So it'll make it easier for everyone to keep track and progress together. Thanks
she was cute as a button. her and henry were debating normative statements on the last 7sage podcast she was on and she gave some very clever response to one of his points. it was toward the end of the episode, something about "just because i can doesnt mean i should" or something like that
26 y/o working part-time while prioritizing studying for the June test. Projected to finish the curriculum beginning of April and want to drill practice tests and problem sets. Identify weaknesses/strengths and test taking strategies and... Accountability and overall success as a team!
highly appreciated :)
Looking for motivated individuals who will hold each other accountable to grind it out this next month, and crush APRIL Lsat.
Admin note: Edited title. Please do not post threads or comments in all caps. This is against the Forum Rules. Thanks!
Hi guys,
I was wondering if proctored PT classes are gonna make a comeback (I recall they used to be done on Saturdays or Sundays in the afternoon)?
Hi everyone!
I know this might be a reach since the April exam is right around the corner but I was wondering if there was anyone in the Connecticut area who was looking for a study buddy or group. I'm open to both virtual or in person.
I'm looking to create a safe space for motivation, sharing, and learning for the upcoming April LSAT exam.
Please feel free to comment if you're in the area or looking to get a study group going!
Thanks!
Simple enough haha
