I got this one right initially, however in blind review I changed my answer to D.
I thought D was more right because it directly applied the missing assumption to her theory.
Would D have been correct if it had said Smith's theory about the relation of social circumstances to the understanding of meaning lacks insight (into her own social circumstances).
Was that extra blurb at the end all that was missing?
Noooo omg B seemed too obvious to be right </3 I didn't choose B because I thought it was already implied. I'm not denying that it's correct, just trying to figure out my thought process for future questions that are similar. If we know she's not aware of the true meaning, wouldn't that automatically imply AC (B) since it's just the contrapositive? If someone understands please explain.
This one did not make me barf, is that a good thing? I cannot tell anymore, this section might ask, "If you cannot barf then why would it not be a good thing?"
I've gotten nearly all of these right and I honestly have no idea why. I can't actually explain what I'm thinking it just feels like the answer choice I pick makes the most sense to me given the context.
Does anyone have an approach they're using that they can explain/frame for me? I want to understand!
i had it right the first time but the Blind review automation made me doubt my answer i need to put me first and not do blind reviews unless i get the answer flat out wrong and know that first :,
ngl, I saw how weird this passage was and decided to just not try to figure out the logic at all. Is that a good idea? I got the right answer because of understanding what the passage said and got it under the suggested time, but should I have been working with the logic? I try to use it, and it has helped, but I have gotten tripped up on some questions trying to figure out the exact logic when if I had just gone ahead with intuition I would have been more successful.
#feedback Does it not also say that if we negate the sufficient, we can't infer anything from it? I'm a little confused
0
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
98 comments
I got this one right initially, however in blind review I changed my answer to D.
I thought D was more right because it directly applied the missing assumption to her theory.
Would D have been correct if it had said Smith's theory about the relation of social circumstances to the understanding of meaning lacks insight (into her own social circumstances).
Was that extra blurb at the end all that was missing?
I got this right but was unable to determine why the other answer choices are wrong
Noooo omg B seemed too obvious to be right </3 I didn't choose B because I thought it was already implied. I'm not denying that it's correct, just trying to figure out my thought process for future questions that are similar. If we know she's not aware of the true meaning, wouldn't that automatically imply AC (B) since it's just the contrapositive? If someone understands please explain.
If only all the SA questions could be related to PSAa questions.
Even though it took me five plus minutes to parse through the stimulus, I was able to confidently find the correct answer.
I diagrammed this out and found the correct answer without POE but it took way too long.
Got one right (finally), but saying this is 3-star difficulty is bonkers.
This one did not make me barf, is that a good thing? I cannot tell anymore, this section might ask, "If you cannot barf then why would it not be a good thing?"
I've gotten nearly all of these right and I honestly have no idea why. I can't actually explain what I'm thinking it just feels like the answer choice I pick makes the most sense to me given the context.
Does anyone have an approach they're using that they can explain/frame for me? I want to understand!
That's it - I'm moving on to the next question type. I'll return to this section when I've been properly sedated.
in my opinion this 3 star is harder than the last 5 star question
this section makes me wanna d!e
i havent gotten any of these right and the explanations barely make any sense to me.
i had it right the first time but the Blind review automation made me doubt my answer i need to put me first and not do blind reviews unless i get the answer flat out wrong and know that first :,
Needed this win
bruh i only got like three right
i finally got one right om fg
bro i need to stop second guessing myself
the inner machinations of Smith's mind are an enigma.
"this is next level f*ckery." Yeah, that's how we're all feeling rn
im so bad at this oh my gawddd my shaylaaa
ngl, I saw how weird this passage was and decided to just not try to figure out the logic at all. Is that a good idea? I got the right answer because of understanding what the passage said and got it under the suggested time, but should I have been working with the logic? I try to use it, and it has helped, but I have gotten tripped up on some questions trying to figure out the exact logic when if I had just gone ahead with intuition I would have been more successful.
#help
I got this correct but had my Lawgic wrong. Why is it UTM ---> insight SC and not insight SC ----> UTM
“Next level fuckry” indeed JY 🤣
Got it right though 2/10 today, we fight on peeps!
caught it in BR thank god
#feedback Does it not also say that if we negate the sufficient, we can't infer anything from it? I'm a little confused