LSAT Trainer LR Concepts Supplemented with 7Sage LR - Flaw

Priyanka

Hey Guys,

While 7Sage lists 19 different flaw types, The Trainer lists 3 (piece does not equal puzzle, apples do not equal oranges, and 1+1 does not equal 3). I'm a little confused - can the 19 different flaw types fall under these 3 categories? If so, do you prefer going by 7Sage or the Trainer's methods when doing flaw questions?

Thanks so much!

MrSamIam

I haven't gotten to the Flaw lesson in the Trainer or 7Sage. However, judging by what you've posted, the Trainer separates the flaws more broadly that does 7Sage. For instance I can think of 3 or 4 different flaws that would fall under "Piece not puzzle."
The last course I took taught us that there were 20+ types of flaws (and about 150+ ways that they could be worded).
Honestly, over time you learn not too worry too much about the category for which a flaw falls under. You would be better served understanding how to identify a flaw, and getting used to the LSAT's convoluted language (e.g. how they word the different types of flaws).

Pacifico

7Sage's approach mixes some classic logical fallacies with some conditional logic forms while the Trainer goes broad with its three possibilities. Whatever speaks to you personally is the better way to go because at some point this type of overemphasis on classification becomes somewhat arbitrary. It is better that you can identify flaws when you see them and can articulate those flaws rather than just saying oh that's an apples/oranges flaw. I think the better takeaway from the Trainer is talking about the phrasing of taking for granted, overlooking possibilities, etc. since that is how it is written on the LSAT.

rikko

Couldn’t help to chime in. Agreed with Mr. Samlom...There's no way to try identify XX types of flaws under 1min 30 Sec. I am coming to the conclusion that we need to use our common sense and instincts to answer those questions correctly. It becomes apparent (no offense to anyone) that the LSAT preparation became an "industry", and various "courses" are trying to outdo each other with the magic "cure" to our problems. Practice real Prep tests, watch the indicators, quantifiers, and get used to decipher the LSAT lingo. Also, check the LSAT Hack's explanations, since there are very logical (and free). Practice makes it perfect… (so little time, so many Prep tests!)

Priyanka

Thank you so much everyone! Really appreciate the advice.

tanes256

If you notice that you're missing the Flaw questions on PT or drills then during your BR you can take a look at the different type of flaws to get familiar with them so that you can recognize the flaw if presented again. I wouldn't worry about trying to memorize them.

Priyanka

Perfect. That's a good strategy - thank you!

c.janson35

There's a difference between memorizing the flaws and familiarizing yourself with them. It's not necessary that you memorize any lists, but you definitely want to take your time to familiarize yourself with the most common flaw types, whether that be through 7sage or The Trainer. The goal is to have a working knowledge of flaws, so as Pacifico said, choose whichever method allows you to do that. I'm partial to the list of 20 or so flaws on 7sage.

Also a side note: The Trainer does have 3 broad categories of flaws, but each category is broken down further into subcategories.

LARamsNation

@c.janson35 said:
There's a difference between memorizing the flaws and familiarizing yourself with them. It's not necessary that you memorize any lists, but you definitely want to take your time to familiarize yourself with the most common flaw types, whether that be through 7sage or The Trainer.

Completely agree.. IMO, memorizing flaws is a huge waste of time. It's good to familiarize yourself with them, but the LSAT will rarely word a flaw A.C. with the way you expect it to be worded. The trainer is a MUST have to comprehend and be efficient with flaws, and 7sage is a great complement to it as they are explained in JY's videos. But at the end of the day, I'm hitting 90% of flaw questions through PTs 50-75, primarily because of the way the trainer teaches to think of flaws in the abstract, as opposed to classifying them into one particular flaw type. Conversely, I'm struggling mightily with Strengthen questions, floating around 61% accuracy, so I'm gonna run through JY's entire curriculum for strengthening questions to try and rectify the issue.

nicole.hopkins

@180orBust said:
The trainer is a MUST have to comprehend and be efficient with flaws, and 7sage is a great complement to it as they are explained in JY's videos.

Agree with this here—Trainer is the macro, 7sage is the micro. Yin/yang.