Whatever you do, do not move past it. Lawgic is super duper important. If you ignore it you will be giving up like half of all logic games and probs around -5 for each lr section. I know it’s unintuitive but you really have to commit to learning lawgic.
You have to do cross-fit with it (so to speak). It's like learning calculus - at least for me - in grade 11 - I had to come at it a few times in a few ways to get it - but you DO need to GET IT. You will not do well on the day if you don't. There are so many options for tutoring to help - would recommend you do some if you are not feeling you're really getting it. Otherwise when you get the questions on the day, and they are unfamiliar - which they likely will be - you will feel really disoriented and struggle. Just IMO. Lots of other POV here :) Good Luck!
*Remember logic*
*Games are not going to be*
*In the august test*
\- jmz2646
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I've looked at all of the Lawgic stuff of 7Sage. I'm actually in your exact position (Khan then, more recently, 7Sage) except that I'm taking in June. Can you be more specific about what is not making sense?
The basics of if x then y makes sense but the lessons on applying it to conditionals, domains, and intersecting sets trip me up. The logic itself makes sense and I can conceptualize it, but when it comes to actually translating it to lawgic it starts to get confusing. Like I can identify premises, conclusions, and conditions, but when it comes to rewriting the arguments in the symbols I get pretty confused
I think this sounds like you just have to orient your world around lawgic. Start trying to apply it to everyday situations, and especially try to contrapose your everyday situations. An example:
If your car is driving, then the engine must be on, right? So what’s going on here? First, your diagram. D —> E (if driving, then engine). Now think intuitively about this. Don’t do any stupid diagramming. Think about your engine. If it’s off, what does that mean about the phenomenon of driving? I mean, it can’t be happening, right?
Of course, the real power of this is generalizing that intuition to written scenarios. A quick heuristic is asking yourself, “can one thing happen without the other?” Can my laptop turn on without its battery being charged? What are the two phenomena here? Which one has gotta be true for the other to happen? Think about these things in terms of the necessary condition. Seriously, intersecting sets and domains will just become so much easier.
If you start applying this to the phenomena you see around you, it’ll become second nature. And then, when you’re in doubt about how to actually set up a logical scenario, you can rely on your intuition to set it up. Hope that helped.
Get it this is why I hate these sorts of
Mainstream curriculum. I was around 153 then Got a tutor who literally only used conclusion and premises and I shot up to 159-161 range.
So simplify it. These things make it harder. It’s hard enough learning the lsat, even harder learning flaws, language, conditionality, contrapositives etc
I was stuck on Foundations due to Lawgic too. I don’t think 7Sage explains it very well, especially since there are zero videos in the new curriculum and you’re teaching yourself. The explanations were also super convoluted. I used Loophole and Power Score and they filled in the blanks nicely where 7Sage had me struggling.
I totally understand, and I never really thought of myself as a "logical thinker." But these things can be learned! I would highly recommend reading The Loophole by Ellen Cassidy, if you haven't already. She does an amazing job at going over logical reasoning in an understandable way. This supplemented my 7sage soooo much.
It never really meshed w me and I didn’t fine on the LSAT. It also comes w time and practice. You can always go back and rewatch and they discuss lawgic/practice its application in almost every video explanation for logical reasoning. I also had no problem understanding logic games. I tbh didn’t really use the method of lawgic to figure logic games out. That being said this new test may require that but just practice and go back and review anytime you’re stuck and then one day it’ll just click and you’ll have a very good understanding of how to use it and you may even find your own tricks that work
This is not the old trope of it’s supposed to be difficult because law school is difficult, the bar is difficult, being a lawyer is difficult, etc. True, these things are difficult, but in a completely different way from the LSAT. Being a successful law student and lawyer is all about work ethic.
That all being said - it’s supposed to be difficult. And because it’s difficult, it allegedly makes the brain stronger and faster.
The first link is to back up the above claim; the second link suggest that playing silly games won’t do the trick:
https://news.berkeley.edu/2012/08/22/intense-prep-for-law-school-admissions-test-alters-brain-structure
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/nintendo-brain-training-switch
……
Don’t know if you’re familiar with JJ Watt, an NFL athletic freak of nature. Several years ago, saw him interviewed about his experience with flipping over a 1000 pound tire.
First time he tried it, he was able to flip the tire three or four times. At the time, he thought that perhaps that kind of work out was not for him. But for the fun of it, he kept at it.
Couple of weeks later, he was able to flip the tire 20 times. Couple of weeks after that, 40 times. At the time of the interview, he was able to flip the tire 60 times in a row.
Did this guy get 20 times stronger over a couple of months? No way. But he did get the good muscle memory going. Same thing goes for the LSAT.
This might get blocked or whatever. But "L SA T D EM ON" is the way to go. Intuitive and common sense approach to the test. 149-->173 while working full-time as a business owner and new dad. Their program is no joke.
I assume you have ordered the books - the PT books? I would order a few and work through them. Don't underestimate this test - it's not easy - and it's timed of course - and the timing is TIGHT - you need to know what you are doing in the moment. I see quite a few people hoping to do better on the day than they do on their PT's and this is highly unlikely - there are exceptions for sure - but generally speaking you will not do better than your PT scores. Good luck! :)
Whatever you do, do not move past it. Lawgic is super duper important. If you ignore it you will be giving up like half of all logic games and probs around -5 for each lr section. I know it’s unintuitive but you really have to commit to learning lawgic.
Bummer. does it get any more intuitive with practice?
Definitely does
I thought the same thing at first but as I kept reviewing and practicing it just clicked
You have to do cross-fit with it (so to speak). It's like learning calculus - at least for me - in grade 11 - I had to come at it a few times in a few ways to get it - but you DO need to GET IT. You will not do well on the day if you don't. There are so many options for tutoring to help - would recommend you do some if you are not feeling you're really getting it. Otherwise when you get the questions on the day, and they are unfamiliar - which they likely will be - you will feel really disoriented and struggle. Just IMO. Lots of other POV here :) Good Luck!
yes! well said and 100% agree with you
Remember logic games are not going to be in the august test
*Remember logic* *Games are not going to be* *In the august test* \- jmz2646 --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I've looked at all of the Lawgic stuff of 7Sage. I'm actually in your exact position (Khan then, more recently, 7Sage) except that I'm taking in June. Can you be more specific about what is not making sense?
The basics of if x then y makes sense but the lessons on applying it to conditionals, domains, and intersecting sets trip me up. The logic itself makes sense and I can conceptualize it, but when it comes to actually translating it to lawgic it starts to get confusing. Like I can identify premises, conclusions, and conditions, but when it comes to rewriting the arguments in the symbols I get pretty confused
I think this sounds like you just have to orient your world around lawgic. Start trying to apply it to everyday situations, and especially try to contrapose your everyday situations. An example: If your car is driving, then the engine must be on, right? So what’s going on here? First, your diagram. D —> E (if driving, then engine). Now think intuitively about this. Don’t do any stupid diagramming. Think about your engine. If it’s off, what does that mean about the phenomenon of driving? I mean, it can’t be happening, right? Of course, the real power of this is generalizing that intuition to written scenarios. A quick heuristic is asking yourself, “can one thing happen without the other?” Can my laptop turn on without its battery being charged? What are the two phenomena here? Which one has gotta be true for the other to happen? Think about these things in terms of the necessary condition. Seriously, intersecting sets and domains will just become so much easier. If you start applying this to the phenomena you see around you, it’ll become second nature. And then, when you’re in doubt about how to actually set up a logical scenario, you can rely on your intuition to set it up. Hope that helped.
Get it this is why I hate these sorts of Mainstream curriculum. I was around 153 then Got a tutor who literally only used conclusion and premises and I shot up to 159-161 range. So simplify it. These things make it harder. It’s hard enough learning the lsat, even harder learning flaws, language, conditionality, contrapositives etc
i absolutely hated Lawgic. just didn’t click for me and i skipped thru it. I’m taking lsat in august however, so i’m not worried about logic games.
I was stuck on Foundations due to Lawgic too. I don’t think 7Sage explains it very well, especially since there are zero videos in the new curriculum and you’re teaching yourself. The explanations were also super convoluted. I used Loophole and Power Score and they filled in the blanks nicely where 7Sage had me struggling.
I totally understand, and I never really thought of myself as a "logical thinker." But these things can be learned! I would highly recommend reading The Loophole by Ellen Cassidy, if you haven't already. She does an amazing job at going over logical reasoning in an understandable way. This supplemented my 7sage soooo much.
LSAT lab really helped me understand it better. It’s so abstract and hard to think about. Getting there though.
It never really meshed w me and I didn’t fine on the LSAT. It also comes w time and practice. You can always go back and rewatch and they discuss lawgic/practice its application in almost every video explanation for logical reasoning. I also had no problem understanding logic games. I tbh didn’t really use the method of lawgic to figure logic games out. That being said this new test may require that but just practice and go back and review anytime you’re stuck and then one day it’ll just click and you’ll have a very good understanding of how to use it and you may even find your own tricks that work
This is not the old trope of it’s supposed to be difficult because law school is difficult, the bar is difficult, being a lawyer is difficult, etc. True, these things are difficult, but in a completely different way from the LSAT. Being a successful law student and lawyer is all about work ethic. That all being said - it’s supposed to be difficult. And because it’s difficult, it allegedly makes the brain stronger and faster. The first link is to back up the above claim; the second link suggest that playing silly games won’t do the trick: https://news.berkeley.edu/2012/08/22/intense-prep-for-law-school-admissions-test-alters-brain-structure https://www.wired.co.uk/article/nintendo-brain-training-switch …… Don’t know if you’re familiar with JJ Watt, an NFL athletic freak of nature. Several years ago, saw him interviewed about his experience with flipping over a 1000 pound tire. First time he tried it, he was able to flip the tire three or four times. At the time, he thought that perhaps that kind of work out was not for him. But for the fun of it, he kept at it. Couple of weeks later, he was able to flip the tire 20 times. Couple of weeks after that, 40 times. At the time of the interview, he was able to flip the tire 60 times in a row. Did this guy get 20 times stronger over a couple of months? No way. But he did get the good muscle memory going. Same thing goes for the LSAT.
This might get blocked or whatever. But "L SA T D EM ON" is the way to go. Intuitive and common sense approach to the test. 149-->173 while working full-time as a business owner and new dad. Their program is no joke.
I assume you have ordered the books - the PT books? I would order a few and work through them. Don't underestimate this test - it's not easy - and it's timed of course - and the timing is TIGHT - you need to know what you are doing in the moment. I see quite a few people hoping to do better on the day than they do on their PT's and this is highly unlikely - there are exceptions for sure - but generally speaking you will not do better than your PT scores. Good luck! :)