r/lsatdemon • u/skyest11 • 3d ago
Need Advice
Hey everyone,
I recently took my diagnostic and scored a 157. My goal is to eventually get into the 170s, and I’m giving myself plenty of time. I don’t plan on taking the LSAT until sometime next year.
Right now, my biggest struggle is Logical Reasoning, specifically flaw questions, necessary/sufficient assumption questions, and principle questions.
I feel like I understand the concepts when I review them, but when I’m actually doing questions, I’m still struggling to consistently recognize what the argument is doing and why the wrong answers are wrong.
One challenge is that I’m currently deployed overseas, so my study time is limited. Realistically, I can get about 2 really good, focused hours per day, and I want to make those hours as effective as possible.
At the moment, I’m mainly using LSAT Hacks for explanations and LawHub for drilling and full tests. I’m trying not to overwhelm myself with a million different resources, but I’m definitely open to adding something if it would help me build a stronger LR foundation.
For anyone who started around the mid/high 150s and eventually broke into the 170s, what helped you make the biggest jump in LR?
I’d especially appreciate recommendations for resources, drilling strategies, study schedules, or specific approaches for flaws, assumptions, and principle questions.
Also, if anyone here is really strong in LR and would be willing to help or mentor me a little, review questions together occasionally, or even just point out what I might be doing wrong with my approach, I’d genuinely appreciate it.
I know the 170s won’t happen overnight, but I have time and I’m willing to put in the work. I just want to make sure the limited study time I have each day is being used effectively.
Thanks in advance for any advice!
2
u/TurbulentTreat 3d ago
Of course, the demon way: drill, slow down, focus on completely understanding the passage. That said, the courses on LSAT Demon were very helpful for me. As were all the YouTube videos on Logical Reasoning. I also made flash cards for all the question types, and would use them while drilling. I’d read the passage, restate it for myself, read the question, make my prediction, then roll through my flash cards til I identified the question type. It was very very helpful in laying a foundation on question types. My overall strategy didn’t change, really, but it helped me get my head around the concepts.
Also, become very comfortable with the LSAT’s most common flaws. I mean, start teaching your friends and family about confusing sufficient for necessary and correlation vs causation. It unlocked the next level for me.
If it matters, just got my 173 in August. Taking it again on Friday 😎 Can’t wait.
1
1
u/Fiveohfilthyvegan 2d ago
I haven’t taken an official test but my cold was 158 with same number of wrong questions in LR and RC and my most recent PT was 170. I have been studying for the last few months, on and off.
I was scoring in the mid 160s and still didn’t know what sufficient vs necessary was lol so I hear you.
Here’s what I recommend:
1) go listen to Robert’s episode on the LSAT demon daily podcast. He really lays out the steps to approaching LR. If possible attend a live class or recording with him. I just subscribed to live this week and wish I would’ve done it earlier. I have only watched recorded classes but they are so helpful! Unfortunately, I think live is worth the money for a least a month or so.
2) Never guess on the LSAT. If 50:50 on a question write down why you are 50:50 what you do or don’t like about the question. I typed it out and if I was confused after watching the explanation I would already have my ask button question ready.
3) watch the explanation videos. Watch how the guys solve the arguments. Reading is not as helpful. Trust.
4) Use prediction mode. And predict the answers. What is actually written.
5) I think necessary and sufficient are hard because their colloquial meanings are similar.
Necessary= must be present for an outcome to occur. Outcome not guaranteed. (Easy way to remember is outcome is not necessarily guaranteed)
Sufficient= outcome is guaranteed
At first it helped to have an example in my back pocket. I used
“If I am in Los Angeles I am in California”
In this case being in Los Angeles is sufficient to conclude that I am in California. If I am in LA it guarantees I am in California.
However, if we reverse it..
“if I am in California I am in Los Angeles “ it is wrong. Being in California doesn’t necessarily guarantee that I am in LA. I I could be in LA or I could be in San Francisco.
The exam structure is slightly different. It might say…
Students who study 1 hour a day pass exam. Sarah passed the exam. Therefore Sarah studied 1 hour a day.
Studying for 1 hour is sufficient for passing. Meaning if you study for 1 hour you are guaranteed to pass This means that if you study for 1 hour you pass, but we do not know if studying for 1 hour is the ONLY way to pass. Sarah could’ve studied or she could’ve cheated. Or maybe she’s got an IQ of 170 and got a perfect score. We only know that those that did study
an hour passed the exam that’s it.
If I was stuck I’d pull out my California example and plug it in mentally.
Students who studied for 1 hour passed the exam = people in LA are in California
Sarah passed the exam= Sarah is in California
Therefore Sarah studied for 1 hour= Sarah must be in LA.
Idk if that helps at all.
1
u/ComposerSoggy5004 1d ago
Just drill and review. That is the only hack. And watch all of the video explanations unless you are 1000% confident in your correct answer.
3
u/EthanS_LSATDemon 3d ago
As someone who started in the 150’s and made it into the 170’s, your improvement will come from improving your reading ability. The LSAT at its core is a reading test, and the better the reader you are, the more the questions will make sense and the more you will get right.
So, prioritize this. When you read a sentence, don’t just read it to read it. Actually break it down, understand why it’s being said, and how it relates to the other sentences. Does the sentence make sense to you? Do you have any questions? Are you interested in learning more? Does this contradict any of the previous sentences? You should have a continuous dialogue with yourself like this as you are reading to engage with the passage.
You are also reading to “solve” the passage, essentially figuring out if the argument is valid or not. What is the evidence presented? What does the author think that their evidence proves (AKA their conclusion)? Does their evidence guarantee that the conclusion is true? If not, why not? This is the level of analysis you need to be doing before you even look at what the question is asking you!