I am really confused by this question, partially because I'm not sure what the question stem is asking us to do, but then also, I don't get why the answer is E. I think the q-stem wants us to consider one of the answer choices as the conclusion put out by the health association. I just feel very lost by this question.

The critic seems to undermine B, but I guess its wrong because its not something the Health Association would say? A-D don't seem to be things that the critic would undermine. They seem irrelevant.

The only way I look at E is that since volunteers are able to suceed, something stronger than a volunteer (being told by a physician) would also have to succeed and the critic's response is still applicable?

My reading comprehension is ok (miss 5-10), try as I might I cant seem to get my score up, so I am starting to think outside the box to broaden my familiarity with different topics. Luckily science is not bad for me however, I struggle with the art and humanities passages. So I was wondering if there are any outside reading materials that would be beneficial. I know the Economist is a good one however, their subscription is pretty expensive. I did look at the New Yorker, and Scientific America but would like to know if there are others out there of a similar caliber. Please let me know

not sure if this is a silly question and i know everyone is different but is it recommended to be doing the syllabus in order? or should be looking at different chapters at once

Hey everyone...

I'm only about a quarter of the way through the curriculum, so perhaps this is discussed later in the courses, but after being confused with how group 3 and 4 interact, I sought out explanations as to how to combine rules and ultimately settled on just following the rules as JY presented them...

However, that led me to thinking of examples where this might not hold true, and I came up with the following example which combines group 1 and group 3, based on the example from the cheatsheet:

All horses are strong, unless they have been drugged.

Obviously, grammatically this isn't a complicated sentence, so I suspect it is something we would see fairly frequently on the LSAT. That being said, I'm curious how we tranlslate a more complicated sentence like above? What I came up with was:

All: group 1, sufficient

All horses: H

are strong: S

H-->S

/S-->H

unless: group 3, negate sufficient

unless they have been drugged: D

At this point, it seems like if we treat the first statement, "All horses are strong" as X, and "unless then have been drugged" as Y, then we should have /Y-->X

Therefore, is the following correct?

/D-->H-->S

/S-->/H-->D

If it is not a horse that is strong, then it has been drugged.

Please #help?

Hi there,

I'm wondering if someone would like to have a look at my GPA addendum explaining why my GPA drop while I was in university. I did take one year off to do college for a year and I passed it and then another year off to do work. I did graduate last April 2020, however not the GPA I hoped for.

I'm more than willing to have a look at your essay in exchange for your kindness (maybe anything but a full PS draft for that paragraph lol, but if you also want to also look at my why school statement once I finish it ----).

Thanks in advance!

How do you all prep for the essay? I don't see too many practice prompts out there. It seems easy enough, but just want to be prepared.

Hey everyone, this may be an odd post but I needed to get it out there since reading through different peoples goals/expectations can be taxing and pretty daunting. "If I don't apply at this time I have no shot, if I don't get this score with my GPA I have no shot" etc., you get the point. So I currently work at a law firm and pretty much have a solid job opportunity post Law School. So I don't need a 170 + to even have a chance and care to apply to schools, nor do I absolutely have to get a scholarship in any way. I'm actually aiming for the more realistic score of around 153-155 which would allow me to attend a school close to me, Philadelphia area and still work if I'm able. It's not a must. So I would appreciate any tips on what I should really go heavy on with drilling etc. to get in that score range. I'm currently scoring around 146 but just need that extra bump. Any suggestions would be much appreciated. Thanks everyone!

Hi,

Below are two answer choices of a method of reasoning question.

(I don't quite remember which PT they are from exactly; they were transcribed here from my LSAT language journal.)

[A] demonstrates a certain principle is untenable on its own terms.

[B] shows that the idea should not be taken since doing so leads to an undesirable consequence.

I am okay with B whereas it's very difficult for me to reverse engineer an argument suitable for A.

Q1 Could someone help formulate such an argument?

Q2 Could someone explain what does it mean by "untenable on its own terms"?

Many thanks,

Leon

[I am posting on behalf of a 7Sage user. Please feel free to leave your comments below. Thank you for your help!]

Is it possible to brute force most of the time instead of making worlds? Is it possible to just make inferences/deductions and go for the questions. Some times I can make worlds and it makes sense but some other times, I'll watch and rewatch JY's videos and the worlds don't stick with me. What should I do? Just go about it the way that feels most comfortable and use the videos as a guide or just try and train my mind to how he teaches it?

Thanks

I've been averaging -3 per LR section, though sometimes I do as well as -1 and other times I hit -5.

I find that I've been getting a lot faster. I'm able to finish the first 10 questions in about 8.5 minutes and I can comfortably finish the first 15 questions in 15 minutes. I'm now able to save about 5 minutes at the end of the section to review my flagged questions. I find that this isn't enough time to thoroughly review my flagged questions, and I often end up getting the flagged questions wrong.

I also find that I'm more often getting the 4-star (according to 7Sage) questions wrong than the 5-star ones, although I do miss some "curve-breaker" questions. When I do get a question wrong, it is almost always due to one of three general reasons: (1) a careless mistake that I can easily correct in Blind Review; (2) I picked the second most attractive AC; (3) I just have no idea where to even start with the question, or what the argument is saying. (3) is quite rare.

For those of you who are able to get -1 to -0 consistently:

What is your timing strategy? 25 in 25, or something even more aggressive? How much time do you save to review your flagged questions? How many questions do you skip in the first round?

Do you read all the answer choices? I find that, for many of the early questions (Q1-Q10), I can just hunt for the correct answer choice and then move on. This saves me quite a lot of time overall, because reading the other 4 answer choices to confirm that they are indeed incorrect can take me anywhere from 10 seconds to 30 seconds per question.

Most of the time I don't make any mistakes in these early questions, but from time to time I'll get 1-2 questions wrong in Q1-Q10 mostly due to carelessness. In your opinion, is it ever worth examining the other answer choices in the early questions? Should I at least skim each of the other answer choices, even if I don't linger on them? What level of certainty do you aim for before moving on from a question? At what point in the section do you start paying more attention to each of the answer choices, giving each one a closer look?

What is your advice for getting from where I am now to -0 to -1 consistently? How do I get more consistent? Are there any strategies you would recommend? Should I push my speed even more for the early questions?

J.Y. often says that no one can realistically aim for -0 in a LR section consistently, because it's just really hard to do and heavily dependent on luck. Has this been true in your experience?

Thank you all!

[New post with study group info for April exam to follow]

Wouldn’t have been possible without 7Sage, thank you!!! But always remember, “it’s not the destination, it’s the journey” .... Mamba Mentality :)

I am applying for accommodations, as I have had a recent bought with migraines. I wanted to know if anyone had similar reasons for applying for accommodations, and any tips about the process as well. Thanks so much

The purpose of this post is to share what I believe to be a helpful tip/strategy in the context of RC within the LSAT FLEX.

It can be tried by those who are looking to improve their RC scores or improve the consistency of their RC performance through a new strategy. I am certain it will not work for all, but I am equally confident that it is likely to be helpful to some. I would like to know the thoughts of test takers who have done (or give it a try after reading this) and to hear their feedback. Thanks!

Recently I have begun reading RC questions before getting into the passage as a new strategy to see how it would effect performance. In my so far experience, it has yielded positive results, including -0 scores in RC. Afterwards I searched online for general advice and to my surprise most sources recommended against this on the basis that "it is difficult for most people to remember multiple questions while reading through an RC passage." I believe this premise may no longer be true for the following reasons.

1.) Reading the questions first can prime your memory for what is important in the RC and help you read through 'fluff' faster.

2.) Total memorization isn't necessary. Partial, functional memorization can be helpful, and could be possible for many.

3.) Most sources that I found arguing against reading the RC Questions first predate the LSAT Flex. We now have the ability to do something that analog test takers could not. Use "Ctrl + F" to search for the key terms from the questions in the passage. Do it and quickly highlight them before reading the passage. For anyone unaware, using "Ctrl +F" is allowed by LSAC and is possible to do on official PTs and on the LSAT Flex itself.

I find that the above strategy can be quite helpful especially in denser passages. It to helps you focus on what is and is not important to pay attention to. To qualify what I mean by reading the questions first, I mean skimming them quickly looking for key terms/excerpts that they will ask you to either define, explore the relationship of, or make an inference about. Since you can use "Ctrl+F" to find these terms in the passage, you could highlight them right away and trust that the text in relation to these terms may be highly relevant. From there, you can speed through the passage and understand the general message for big picture questions, and spend more time on the areas that you have marked and that you know shall be helpful in ascertaining correct answers.

Last week I posted about my first decision where I got a full ride to one of my safety schools.

Today I got an email from another comparable safety school informing me that I was denied.

I am perplexed. The school that denied me only had my application for one week, which makes me very confused how they could reach a conclusion so quickly.

Even my reach schools haven't rendered denials (decisions) yet and the t14 schools I applied to have been in constant contact with me leading me to believe they are taking my application seriously.

While it is only one school - I am beginning to get fearful that this denial will is going to be a bleak forecast of things to come.

Does anyone have advice how to cope with this? It is quite disconcerning.

Hello everyone. I was just wondering if I need to write an addendum because I cancelled my LSAT the first two times. I obviously plan on taking the LSAT again, and I do not plan on cancelling this time around. Also, are two cancellations going to look bad for me in the application process? My top choice is UVA, and I know I have a long way to go to achieve an acceptable score for the school, but I was just wondering if this would come back to haunt me, especially for a t-14 school. Thank you!

Looking for a little motivation. Idk why I’m having so much trouble getting back into studying. I’ve taken MONTHS off since bombing my November LSAT and am trying to get the discipline/motivation to get back on the horse. I think I’m discouraged with the time I previously feel like I “wasted” with Kaplan. I burned myself out only to get a crazy low score and now am having trouble getting myself to buckle down and study again. Has this happened to anyone else?

176/180BR on my last 4. 174 average across last 10.

Free now and tomorrow afternoon. We can go over anything, but I try to focus on overall attack and review strategies, diagnosing current issues, and test psychology. I find that the finer details typically work themselves out if you take the right approach.

1/26@2pm EST: @Bagelinthemorning @nwestfallp

1/26@3pm EST: @Its_MyAmbition

1/26@4pm EST: @gandalfthewhite

1/26@5pm EST:

1/26@6pm EST: @swanganie

1/26@7pm EST: @"cole.davis10"

1/26@8pm EST: @"Seek-ing"

@foreverconfused

@daliaglomeli

Slots remaining as per above. For you guys or anyone else reading this, I am ok with groups if you arrange amongst yourselves with the person slotted in that time.

Review template link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-lxq2vj-nRbDbu4-jGhrl-e9otJzFiXd/view?usp=sharing

I'm going through the Loophole in Logical Reasoning book now and there are several pages dedicated to the indicator "unless." Loophole specifies that you must make the target of "unless" the necessary condition, and the sufficient condition is "the way things always are." But 7Sage loops "unless" in (with what Loophole would call "either/or") with Group 3 and says you just have to choose either half of the conditional, make it the sufficient condition, and negate it.

Does the extra distinction in Loophole matter? i.e. is 7sage too broad on "unless"?

Hi guy, a few years ago I attempted to study and take the LSAT, but ultimately I ended up no doing it. Ill just say I lost the motivation to do so. Now I currently work for NBC as a financial Analyst, I love my job and all that we do but I cant get the need to apply to law school out my head has it has always been my goal. my biggest concern now is what will the law schools think of my resume as it is build to gain a job in finance. I have worked both for JP Morgan, Comcast and now NBC universal and I have no Law experience. do you think this will hinder my chance at getting into law school. So far I have 2 degree with a year or 2 apart from different university BA in Psychology -GPA 3.2 from LIU and BS in Finance- GPA 2.9. And if you guys don't think I'm crazy what is a score I should aim for with those type of gpa and work experience .

Hi, I was wondering what everyone has been doing or has done in order to practice and prepare for the LSAT writing portion. Is there any practice materials you recommend?

Basically, how do you study for the Logical Reasoning using a strategic and structured method akin to the foolproof method? I am currently focused on Foolproofing but will be start back on LR soon. I have already finished the CC a while ago and was consistently getting around -8 which was my starting point anyway. I also have the Loophole and will go over it one more time since I rushed through it back in November. I would like to know what other effective strategies people have been using for LR before I start focusing on the section again.

Hi everyone

I have already registered for FebLSAT but Im 5 point away from the grade that I want, and I cant improve by 5 point in less than a month. I was thinking if I don't take LSAT in Feb and take it for the first time in April, Is it going to stay FLEX after April or not? Do you guys have any thoughts about this ?

JY mentioned that a good way to approach RRE Questions would be to view them as weakening questions by negating the last premise / including a new conclusion and then finding the AC that most weakens the new argument.

While this works for regular RRE questions, i'm struggling to apply the method to EXCEPT questions and questions in which there isn't a paradox.

Any advice would be extremely appreciated as this is the question type I struggle with the most.

Hello Everyone!

This is the first of a Full LR Tutoring Series.

This session will be focusing on Most Strongly Supported Questions, all skill ranges are welcome, The session is suited for beginners as well as those struggling with this particular question type. I'll be holding the session Wednesday the 27th at 6PM EST.

We will be going over:

(1) MSS Question Stems

(2) What makes MSS questions unique

(3) My number one tip for solving some MSS questions in under a minute.

We will be using PT(S) 19 - 23 for examples.

See you there!

Topic: LR Series MSS Zoom Meeting

Time: Jan 27, 2021 06:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting

https://us04web.zoom.us/j/78642235015?pwd=d1lMcGE3Y2s3RmdObkY5a0VKbkNUUT09

Meeting ID: 786 4223 5015

Passcode: x7LvQd