Is there any rule of the English language that allows us to tell when the claim "As are B" means every single A is a B, and when "As are B" is a generalization that means only that some or most As are B?

This issue comes up in PT57, Section 2, #12.

The conclusion says that "criminal organizations will try...."

But the premise told us that MOST criminal organizations' main purpose is profits.

If you add the correct answer to the argument, it's sufficient to prove that MOST criminal organizations will try to become involved. But the conclusion here is "criminal organizations", which grammatically seems to mean all criminal organizations. So the conclusion technically is still not fully proven even with the "sufficient" assumption added. The only way the correct answer is sufficient is by reading the conclusion as giving us a statement about "some" or "most" criminal organizations. How does this add up? Any thoughts?

Here are additional example sentences to explore the issue:

"Dinosaurs are extinct." Does that mean some dinosaurs or all dinosaurs are extinct? I submit that it clearly means all, and not only some.

"football players with at least one year of experience in the NFL are used to taking hits." Does that mean some or all players with one year of experience? I submit it means all NFL players with at least one year of experience.

"Criminal organizations will try to become involved in tech revolutions." Does this mean some or all crim organizations will try to become involved? If the first two example sentences apply to "all", then what distinguishes this last example from the others?

The issue seems to be that sometimes plural nouns are referring to all members of the group, and sometimes they're not. But what are the rules governing such interpretation? "Videogames are fun." Is that asserting that every single videogame is fun? I submit that it's ambiguous. Naturally, I would not think that claim commits one to thinking that every single video game is fun...maybe there are a lot that are not fun, but generally, videogames are fun. However, in a hyper-literal logical thinking type of analysis, I could easily see that sentence implying that, yes, all videogames are fun.

How about this example? "Apples are fruit." vs. "Apples are healthy." The first statement means all individual apples are fruit -- it'd be very odd to think it leaves open the possibility that some apples are not fruit. Yet the second statement seems to mean that apples generally are healthy and is not asserting that every single apple in the universe is healthy...some might be unhealthy/poisonous etc. But WHY do we interpret these sentences differently and how can one tell the correct interpretation?

Hey all!

Does anyone have any advice on which PTs are essential to cover before the February test? Obviously tricky ones like 79, 81... but any others? If you felt like you struggled in a certain aspect of the test, was there a PT that you thought was personally really helpful that you covered?

To everyone studying for the February test (like me) we can do it! Good luck to all!

OKAY, I have been almost mastered my LG skills and have been getting the 100% with untimed pts (under 1 hour ). And most of the time, the wrong answers were from my small mistakes. HOWEVER, I am completely lost with LR & RC. Yes, maybe it is because my reading skills are sucks to comprehend or to make an inference from the passage? I can admit that I was never a reader, never really enjoyed reading, but what can I do ? I have no choice since I want to go to the law school and become a lawyer. I have been studying for almost 2 months, 5 days a week, almost 10 hours a day at the library, but LR and RC are killing me.... It's really painful to see myself just staring at the passages and not even understanding or cant even comprehend with the questions or answer choices.... I really believed that I have been studying so hard but I don't see any improvement on those two sections..

Any advice to save my poor life : (

Can someone please tell me a story where they took the diagnostic and scored like, low 130s, but after months of studying improved drastically? I read a forum of people taking the diagnostic and scoring over 155 and I just feel like crap right now haha. I realize some people are naturally gifted when it comes to the LSAT, and I am happy for them, but I am not one of those people. I'm really struggling here. Just BR an LR section and only got 11 questions right.

Thought it could be fun and motivating to hear other people's stories about why they are starting down this path. So, what's your story? Do you come from a long line of lawyers? Is there something specific you want to accomplish? Are you not sure what else you should do with your life and this seemed reasonable enough? (Maybe not that last one haha)

It's supposed to help with understanding topics you're unfamiliar with and just a supplement to actual studying.

I have a tedious desk job and used to play netflix in the background but now I'm trying to do something to stimulate my brain a bit. I've been listening to Radio Lab.

Or audiobook recs!

.

So, I chose B at first and then changed to C for BR. Now I know why B and C both cannot be the correct answer for this question.

B talks about dominant class which we don't know anything about.

C talks about social class which its different from noble class in the premise.

The correct answer for this question was A...

(A) To say that feudalism by definition requires the existence of a nobility is to employ a definition that distorts history.

I understand the answer until "is to employ a definition that distorts history"... How does it distorts history..?

Can somebody explain why A is a correct answer?

Thank you!

Admin note: edited title

I'm curious. For the GPA averages that law schools report, do they use the LSAC GPA of applicants at the time they are admitted, or at the time students enroll in the program? In other words, does a law school report a college seniors LSAC GPA from march when they are accepeted, or from May after they graduate? Thanks!

deleted

Feb LSAT takers, we're almost there!

I've been getting down on myself these last few days, because my LG is not where I want it to be just yet. And so naturally, I've been having another existential crisis. So I decided to sit down and write out how far I've come with my LSAT prep to motivate me to finish strong these next few weeks. It was really helpful, so I thought I'd start a thread so we could all celebrate our growth and keep moving forward.

I understand the LSAT. I know what to look for with each question type.

I finally started consistently scoring -3 in LR. Started off with -11, and this took months and months of work.

I have the stamina to finish tests.

I know how I learn best ( this is my biggest take away).

I can talk myself down from my anxiety in the middle of PT's.

My BR went from 159-178 in 9 months.

What have your takeaways been?

I finishing the LSAT Trainer and I am now deciding what to do next. I'm deciding between 7Sage and the Powerscore Bibles, but I'm leaning heavily towards 7Sage. Is it worth it to buy the Powerscore Bibles or should I just forgot about them and go 7Sage all the way? I'd love to hear about everyone's experiences with either.

from those of you who have already taken the lsat after completing practice tests. how close is your practice score to what you scored on test day?

i have heard that it is easier to make a higher score..anyone else know anything about this?

This is a pretty easy question IMO, but I have a question about why (E) is wrong and the interpretation of "or".

The author of the passage provided Nicaraguan pines as an example of a forest produced in part through controlled burning. The author does not think the pines were produced by natural fires. So the most straightforward explanation for why (E) is wrong is that the author would not agree that the Nicaraguan pines "could have been created by natural fires or controlled burning" because (s)he disagrees with natural fires as the cause.

But consider this: Let's say we know that A is true, and that B is not true. Given that information, can I logically conclude that "Either A is true or B is true"? I submit that the answer is yes. Because we know that A is true, it's a true statement to say that "A is true or B is true." For example, let's say I'm a senior in college. Someone asks me what year I am. I respond, "I am either a junior or senior in college." What I said in response is logically true even though I am not a junior. Or, let's say today is Wednesday. Someone asks what day it is. I say "It's either Wednesday or Thursday." That is a true statement, even though it's not Thursday.

So returning to answer choice (E), if the author's point is that the Nicaraguan pines were produced by controlled burning, then wouldn't the author logically HAVE TO AGREE that the fires could have been created by controlled burning or natural fires? Even if they weren't created by controlled burning, they were created by natural fires. So in the same sense that "I am a junior or senior" is true even if I am only a senior, "Created by controlled burning or natural fires" must be true even if it's just controlled burning. Why is this analysis wrong?

Does it have anything to do with the "could have been created by either" aspect of the answer choice? Some might think that the answer choice is not using "or" in the exact same way as "I am a junior or senior", because whereas that statement is equivalent to asserting that "I am at least one of the following things: junior or senior", the claim that the pines "could have been created by either natural fires or controlled burning" is asserting that both parts of the OR are definitely potential explanations, rather than the idea that "at least one of these explanations is correct". Is that what explains why (E) is wrong? If so, can someone elaborate on the grammatical or contextual rules governing the meaning of "or" in this situation?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-38-section-3-passage-1-questions/

Went theough the LSAT course, took a preptest yesterday, and only scoring a 135. I felt confident in every section aside from logic games, but turns out I got everything wrong. Should i just go through the course from start to finish again? I was supposed to take the feb. lsat but I think i’ll be pushing it back to june.

Today a friend mentioned that headache you get after staring at a computer screen for a long time. Y'know, the one behind the eyes that makes you feel nauseous? This got me thinking about last semester, where I was taking five classes (all required extensive computer use), had a part time job (again, using computers), and working on 7sage (an online course). I would notice after long day of working on the computer, I was groggy and couldn't quite piece things together like normal.

My classes are about a fifteen minute walk from my apartment and I made it a priority to not look at or use technology while walking to class. No answering texts/emails. No listening to podcasts. Nothing. Just me, my thoughts, and my walk. And I think it truly helped.

Einstein would go for daily walks, no matter what. Getting moving not only helps, but so does having an "empty" mind. If you can, I recommend getting a walk in at least once a day. I noticed things on my campus that I've been walking past for three years now. Did walking alone allow me to score 20 points higher on my Dec. test? Nah. But I do think clearing my mind helped my studying. Now that I drive everywhere, I miss the freedom of letting my mind wonder on walks. If you notice yourself stagnating, try to get outside and move a little. Who knows, it may help.

I just took my first diagnostic test cold today and scored 144. I have a history of doing bad on standardized tests (nerves, lack of confidence, getting distracted, etc.) so I'm surprised that I even got a 144. I will be taking the September LSAT so I have quite a lot of time to improve. My top schools include BU, BC, Fordham, and GWU.

What do you guys recommend my first step be from here on out? I purchased the LSAT Trainer already and I am going to start the free trial on here before I upgrade. Any tips/advice/encouragement would be awesome!

About a year ago (a bit longer) I got fired from my second job out of college. Is worked at this job for 3 months then got terminated. Does anyone have helpful advice on how to acknowledge this on a CF essay? Or links to examples?

I've been PTing for about a week now and it's not going great at all.

As soon as I turn on the timer or proctored app, I freeze up and can't even read the first question. I'll read and re-read it three times and then will lose 3 minutes because I was so out of it. I'm not sure what it is -- in university, I never got nervous before timed exams but we always had a decent amount of time to complete them, or at least I felt like I did.

I haven't been able to properly complete a PT because I'll just stare at the paper, lose a significant amount of time, and then stop the timer to get up and take a breather.

Does anyone have advice for how to chill out when taking a timed PT or how you went about doing it in a way that didn't stress you out?

Hi all-

I have a meet and greet with William & Mary Dean's Office next week, and am assuming that I should approach it like an interview. I have the basics down (aka her bio, answers to the usual questions regarding why I chose the school, why I want to pursue law, etc) but was wondering if anyone has either/or:

OR

Thanks and good luck to all on admissions!

I got an email from a law school that I applied to but have not received acceptance into yet. The email said that I should apply for this full ride scholarship, but then it said the requirements are that I must be accepted to get the scholarship. Do you think I got in and the school accidentally sent a scholarship opportunity email before my acceptance email? I just thought it was weird.

Need to write an additional essay on why I want to go to SMU, anyone have experience writing something like this/ have tips for what admissions officers are looking for?

Hello,

I have been really struggling to get a grasp over Logic Games. I sat the LSAT in September and completely messed up everything related to LG. So I have two questions, any advice would be awesome :)

How do you avoid freezing/having a mental blank that completely ruins the whole section? AND

Any tips to make sure that you have made all possible inferences when drawing up your game board?

Thanks and good luck!

Josh

What's your dream school? :)