I have encountered certain questions where often means "Some". I had made a note about it until I came across PT37 S2 Q18 where in answer choice C says " often sacrificed" and it was eliminated because it said often based on one example.

I'd love an explanation for this question along with how to deal with "Often"

Thanks in advance!

how many games should it take?

Hi all.

This is an intentionally short and to-the-point discussion post. I want as much input and insight as I can gain and don't want to turn away any potential comments with a huge long prompt. So please forgive my lack of details.

Things were going so well. I crushed my first prep test, skated through introduction to logic and strengthening questions. I felt good about my LSAT studies and had confidence. Until I started the Validity and Must Be True Questions section. My progress immediately halted. The concepts stopped sticking and I have begun to start losing the confidence and swagger I once had. Specifically, the Valid Argument Forms 1-9 might as well be Greek to me. I have trouble understanding why I need to keep nine fucking argument forms in my head. They appear to have only subtle differences and I don't see how memorizing those details could help increase my LSAT score.

I just want to get back to studying LSAT questions and study things that are directly applicable to the exam.

Now, let's be real. It isn't the awesome service of 7Sage that is discouraging me. I have been really exhausting myself trying to study every minute I have available. Additionally, I have almost completely stopped exercising and my sleep has been disrupted with stress about the exam. I realize that these lifestyle factors play a large part in my academic productivity and I am addressing them. But in the meantime, somebody - ANYBODY - please let me know how I can survive validity/invalidity sections.

Help me! Anyone! I'm losing my fucking mind!

Thanks for feedback!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-3-question-26/

I got this question right during the PT by POE (A-B reverses necessary and sufficient terms, ACD all use most-statements) but in BR I really had to labor over the logic. It in fact took several sessions to feel good about my interpretation. However, my translation differs slightly from JY due to the presence of nested terms so I'm curious what ya'll think about it.

expect benefits outweigh cost → (acquire info → R)

Therefore

acquire info → R

This appears to be the most basic logical structure in the book. A→B, therefore B. We need A. But the nested terms muddy the waters a bit. We need to conclude R which is nested within the necessary condition. Because of the odd form, there are more ways of doing that than just A→B. But, most importantly, we can't conclude R if one expects the "benefits outweigh the cost".

This is really where I had my difficult. the easiest correct AC would have just said "The benefits never outweigh the cost". However, what they gave us was

acquire info → expect benefits outweigh cost

That results in a perfectly valid but unusual form. Our final chain looks like

expect benefits outweigh cost ↔ acquire info → R

"Consumers who do not bother to acquire this info are acting rationally". We can safely say that now because consumers who don't bother to acquire this info also don't expect the benefits to outweigh the costs.

So I haven't experienced burnout yet and I've been pushing myself hours and hours and hours to reach my limit of studying until I can't. I notice that my competitive nature and the fact that I haven't hit my projected score has overridden potential burnout. I'm sure I will burnout soon, but I'm liking that my motivation is currently there. Hopefully it is because I'm aiming higher each time.

Hoping for an extremely productive 2 months before the test.

Need that 10 point jump!

I got credit from a local college in high school and it's been a hassle getting them to send the transcript and LSAC form (they don't do it electronically). They said they sent it on September 29th and I'm wondering how long it typically takes for LSAC to process transcripts during this time of year.

BR is still slightly confusing in the sense that I'm not sure if the first time around (when I'm doing question sets) if I'm supposed to be timing myself. Or am I supposed to take as much time as I can since I'm still in the CC stage? I'm currently doing my Question sets timed and then doing BR after.

Is it less than beneficial to time yourself so early when you're just learning concepts? I don't quite know how to approach this?

Why so confusing?? ?

Any idea when PT82 will become available for purchase? How soon after that can we expect explanations from 7Sage? Might this happen before the December test date?

So when do we think grey day will be? Will there be any delays with the hurricanes? Any idea?

Just wanted to give some hope for other people. Today I took my first timed PT in about a month (I've already FP LG and am now drilling LR). A month ago I got a 161; today - 170! It was PT59, which as far as I know may be the easiest PT ever and my score may drop back down to 160 next week.

Fool proofing works. I got a -1 on LG (granted, there were no odd ones). I'm now going to drill LR even harder. Somehow I have to get my RC up, so if you have any advice please share! I'm shooting for a 170+ in December, and with two months to go it's looking like I might actually have a decent shot.

Currently, I am taking graduate level courses as a non-degree seeking student. Should I add this school to my list on the LSAC website? Also, should I include the school on my resume? I feel like it could help with my application, any advice is much appreciated!

Hi everyone, have any of you subscribed to Law School Transparency Pro (LST Pro)? Is it worth $75?

https://www.lstreports.com/pro/

Can anyone recommend the Manhattan Prep LR for supplementary material? I've been through the CC already and I am wondering if the Manhattan Prep LR will complement/reinforce what was taught in the CC. Also factoring in that I am signed up for the December test giving me about 8 weeks till then. I am in the PT phase and I just want to gauge what you all think about this and if it is even worth it at this point. Thanks!

Hello Folks,

I posted this in the powerscore forum as well, but it looks a little dead over there. I was hoping I might be able to pick someone's brain about a particular question.

Hello everyone,

I'm working on conditional reasoning. Overall, I find using my intuition works 80% of the time, but sometimes I'm going to need to use the techniques discuss in Powerscore Logical Reasoning Bible Chapter 6 in order to maximize my score.

So, my question stems from question 2 of chapter 6 on page 171. The question is:

Admin Edit: Please don't post LSAT materials. LSAC owns a copyright on this and posting is a violation of the copyright. For reference, I believe this is from PT 31 Section 3 Number 22.

So, when I use my intuition, I get answer E. But I am practicing my conditional reasoning, and I am not able to get that answer.

I managed to get the following:

NEOR: Nucleomorph is the remains of an engulfed organism's nucleus

SVG: Single version of the gene

(I use slashed /// in order to designate "not")

/NEOR ------> SVG

and the contrapositive

/SVG -------> NEOR

Which, in the book is generally correct. However, the book then suggests that because:

Premise 1: /NEOR --------> SVG (I understand this as noted above)

Premise 2: /SVG

Conclusion: NEOR

And then somehow, to my bafflment, they come up with the statement that:

SVG ------> /NEOR (This is neither the contrapositive or the replication of the original conditional reasoning as it appears in the last sentence. In fact, it simply looks like a Mistaken Reveral to me.)

I am NOT understanding how they build this conditional reasoning argument. Indeed, my only clue is that maybe a premise=sufficient condition and that a conclusion=necessary condition that maybe this is how they ended up doing it? But my searches online don't show this to be true.

Additionally, answer choice E does not have any conditional indicators, making it difficult to decide what is the necessary and sufficient condition for choosing your answer. Are there any resources out there that help with doing this? Could I ask anyone for a little help? Thanks a tonne!!!

I'm 70% complete with the CC and on the LG section. Should I use these lessons to just learn Logic Games or should I start fool proofing the practice problems JY has listed in the lessons now? For some reason I got the impression that Fool Proofing should be saved for after the CC is completed and when you start PT-ing...

Hey everyone,

I was wondering if there is any interest out there to also blind review the hardest RC passage together each time we do a PT . Maybe we can set aside one separate day to do this. On previous RC tutoring sessions I have noticed blind reviewing RC to take at most 2 hours. I am working on seeing what time we can do this by seeing openings on 7sage calendar. I hope to find an opening on Sunday.

Let me know if there is any interest out there to do this.

UPDATE:

Thanks for all the interest. I went ahead and scheduled the blind review RC meetings for every Sunday at 7 pm. Please treat this blind review call the same as our LR calls by not checking your answers before hand. Also, please have a clean copy of the section and a pencil with you. We will first read the passage together and do low-high resolution summaries and then do the questions under time before going over them as a group.

Here is the link to the meeting. Just click the link at the specified date and time and I will see you there.

70 Plus Series (December LSAT Study Group)

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/305261573

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (669) 224-3412

Access Code: 305-261-573

Joining from a video-conferencing room or system?

Dial: 67.217.95.2##305261573

Cisco devices: 305261573@67.217.95.2

First GoToMeeting? Try a test session: http://link.gotomeeting.com/email-welcome

Hello all. Perhaps this was a question that was touched upon in the recent resume webinar, which I wasn't able to attend (it didn't begin until 1 am here in Iceland) BUT I thought maybe y'all could give me some guidance. I am wondering how/if it's appropriate or normal to include information about past research projects you've done on a resume (or somewhere else in the application process). While the work I did in undergrad was not law related at all, it was published in an undergraduate research journal. And I am currently working on an international law-related thesis-type paper for my grad program. I genuinely want to share with admissions committees what I've been working on because it's really interesting to me, not just because I'm looking for another way of padding my application. This is more true for my grad level writing than undergrad however. So I was just wondering if the best place to do this would be incorporating it into my personal statement? Or am I missing something?

Reading Comprehension is my lowest scoring section. Does anyone have any good tips for improving this area? I know a few people who find RC the easiest read magazines such as the Economist and WSJ. I used to read WSJ when I had the student discount, but only because it didn't cost a lot and their topics actually interested me. Most RC passages aren't as interesting for me. For those of you who have seen improvement and/or do well on RC, do you have any Publications/Magazines that you recommend reading for practice? How often do you read them and what is your strategy for reading them (do you read all the way through, or mark conclusions/premises/etc.)?

Does anyone know if the people that write our letters of recommendation will be notified by LSAC when the letters are used/sent out? I am getting a few letters written for me and I want to decide which one to use for my application package - but it will be awkward if the recommender is told by LSAC that his/her letter was never used. Hope this makes sense. Thanks in advance.

Hello everyone!

So, I have started fool proofing, and I feel like I am not doing it effectively. I generally use the concept of doing the game once. Watched the video explanation. Do it again the same day. Then, do the same game the next day. Wait a week and do the same game again. However, I do not seem to be getting some of the games within time by the 4th try and some of them I am still answering wrong. So, I have thought of some reasons why I may not be grasping the concepts and wanted to get ya'll take on it.

First, I am not focusing specifically on LG. I have split my study times between LG and LR or LG and RC. My LR is doing better, but I also think I put more emphasis on LR. Do you think I should take it section by section instead to focus?

Second, I vary in how many games I will do a day mostly since I split time in studying. For example, I may do 2, 3, or 4 games on my study session. Should I do a whole section each time?

Third, I think my Foolproof cycling is not good. I do the four tries, but since I vary on how many I do, I may start a new game. Also, I have not returned to some of the games that I have done 4 times and not got all the answer right/within time frame. Should I increase my intervals such as: do game x twice in a day, then next week do game x, then next month do game x?

It's funny because the more I type, the more I am seeing what the problem is lol.

Oftentimes, when I sit down to take a practice section or a PT, I tend to psych myself out. I try not to care about the score or how many questions I get wrong, but just trying not to care doesn't really work for me. What are some things you tell yourself or do to get out of your head and genuinely not care about how you do on the test?

I'm not talking about where you don't take the questions seriously--but you take the test in a way where you don't care about doing well in terms of the score, but care about taking the test in a strategic way and just doing your best.

Wash U in St. Louis accepts GRE!

https://abovethelaw.com/2017/10/move-over-lsat-another-law-school-accepts-the-gre/

Hello,

I bought the starter course, and I'm very likely going to buy the Ultimate package. I am taking the December test and will be studying full time as I don't have school or work.

I have a few questions though:

How does the money back guarantee work? Is there anything that would invalidate this?

From people who might have the ultimate package are you finding the test explanations for the more recent tests PT 60 and beyond helpful?

Does the price of extending access go up if I have a better package? (currently it is $25 for one month and $75 for 6 months with the starter package)

Any other comments/advice is welcome!

Thanks for all the help guys, love the course so far.

Best regards,

Patrick

Thanks