27 comments

  • Tuesday, Mar 17

    I was down to A, B, and E, but when I read both B and E, I felt that they were making a stretch and trying to force an implication rather than A, which felt more similar to being halfway between stated and implied on the diagram that we were shown earlier.

    1
  • Sunday, Mar 15

    Coming from a math, science, and engineering background, an answer that is "close enough" is really uncomfortable to me. My biggest source of errors on RC is seeing answers that look "close enough" but not exactly what I expected from a pre-phrase, so I convince myself that that answer is a trap and select another one. I have a feeling I'm going to benefit more from process of elimination than pre-phrasing and hunting for a while until I get used to this type of reasoning and thinking.

    1
  • Thursday, Dec 25, 2025

    If it was test day should I just circle A and move on?

    3
    Friday, Feb 20

    @CodyLevant Depends if you are doing POE or going hunting

    1
  • Monday, Oct 13, 2025

    this is kinda a necessary assumption question, in that the author's argument completely falls apart if "acting morally" does not mean "acting in the best interests of the public"

    4
  • Edited Friday, Sep 5, 2025

    Anyone else see this logical error in the explanation for A?

    What makes actions morally right is their contribution to the public good.

    Morally right -> Contributes to public good

    /Contributes to public good -> /Morally right

    The explanation, however, says:

    Contributes to public good -> morally right

    /contributes to public good -> /morally right

    Did JY make the oldest mistake in the book or am I just tripping.

    1
    Thursday, Sep 11, 2025

    I did not see that myself, but I think you are right? Unless the wording is some kind of bi-conditional that I am not understanding!

    0
    Tuesday, Sep 23, 2025

    @TheBigFatPanda JY was right: the correct direction is Contributes to the public good → Morally right.

    The statement says that what makes actions morally right is their contribution to the public good. In other words, contribution to the public good is sufficient for, or guarantees, moral rightness.

    The other direction, Morally right → Contributes to the public good, would mean every morally right action guarantees a benefit to the public good.

    But the original claim doesn’t say that. There may be cases of actions being morally correct for reasons unrelated to the public good. All the original statement guarantees is that if you contribute to the public good, that action is morally right.

    10
  • Edited Sunday, Aug 31, 2025

    I am doing really good... I am scared that this is just the calm before the storm

    4
  • Sunday, Aug 3, 2025

    are conditional answers generally wrong in implied questions?

    0
    Saturday, Sep 6, 2025

    @Veebeelee Not necessarily. For example, AC A could be rephrased as "If actions are morally right then they contribute to the public good". B is wrong because the author doesn't argue that the risk of personal penalty is what makes an action morally right.

    0
  • Thursday, Mar 27, 2025

    im worried im only doing well on these because he's helping me do the low res

    43
    Friday, May 2, 2025

    Well, yes but it shows you that the method being shown works. So put in the time and trust the process.

    10
  • Tuesday, Jan 21, 2025

    Is it safe to completely rule out A.C's that are explicitly stated in the passage?

    1
  • Monday, Dec 16, 2024

    is "because" typically always a sufficient condition indicator in a conditional statement?

    0
  • Thursday, Aug 22, 2024

    I had some trouble with this question. I understand why E is incorrect, however I was not very attracted to answer choice A because it discusses what is morally right. I felt as though the passage really only focused on what is considered morally right, and the things that make an action morally wrong may not be the same as what makes actions morally right. I really felt like morally right and morally wrong are two separate concepts, and not just opposites of each other. And more generally, I guess it is confusing when to think of two concepts of being related but separate, and when we can say they are true opposites.

    Sorry if this was confusing, but if anyone has any clarity that would be a huge help.

    4
    Thursday, Aug 29, 2024

    I agree with you that (A) doesn't sound super attractive, and very purposefully so, I believe. After all, we're trying to find what is best, not perfect.

    I don't know if it will help, but this is how I simplified both choices:

    (A): Contribute to public good --> Morally right

    (E): Harm others --> Morally wrong

    Reasoning:

    1) Paper mill & industrial waste examples weren't mentioned to show how it "harms others", but rather as the unlikely, "absurd" occurance of them benefitting the public ( they didn't imply stongly enough that they "harms others" which is what I was looking for, in order for (E) to qualify as the correct answer choice).

    2) While (A) (looking at the orange circles Kevin drew in the video, at the last part of the final paragraph) is more strongly supported because the author mentions that the economic consequences (from acting morally) do not excuse the individuals (meaning that they should act morally--laying out what is morally right) to "detract from the public good", which can be said as the opposite of "contribution to public good".

    Now the reasoning sounds more confusing written down compared to when it went through my head,, but hopefully it makes some sense!

    5
    Tuesday, Sep 3, 2024

    tehehe thank you! makes more sense now!

    0
  • Wednesday, Aug 21, 2024

    What is the LR analog to Principle or Generalization questions? PSA?

    0
  • Tuesday, Aug 13, 2024

    4:38 hehe........bEtTeR

    49
    Saturday, Jan 25, 2025

    Literally searched the comments section for this 😂 thought my audio broke.

    5
  • Saturday, Aug 10, 2024

    So for E, when I saw "Unless it harms others" this actually would pose another question in our minds, "what does this LSAT writer mean by harm?" Physically or emotionally? I automatically thought if someone stole $100 from their relative without them knowing, then they were not physically harmed but were financially and emotionally harmed when they realized they were missing money and who did it. I immediately thought no to E as this would lead to more questions on what the writer means in the answer choice.

    0
  • Thursday, Aug 8, 2024

    Curriculum is great, but just going to echo what I have been seeing: give us more You Try's and let us see the passage up front, as well as the questions and answer choices. It helps with engagement

    12
    Kevin_Lin Instructor
    Thursday, Aug 8, 2024

    Noted -- this is currently in progress. Soon there should be a "quickview" button that lets you see the whole passage for every lesson. This is coming to LR, too.

    8
    Saturday, Aug 10, 2024

    Actually, for the first part of RC, I am much preferring this way as we are just in the learning phase. I often felt discouraged in LR when we did You Try's too soon and I would get it wrong. I was intimidated with RC but your videos are helping me to relax while learning and throwing in a couple You Try's like we just did is helping me greatly to not feel too pressured yet. I know the You TRY's are coming soon enough in RC LOL

    8
    Kevin_Lin Instructor
    Monday, Aug 19, 2024

    Quickview button is here! It's at the top of each lesson that uses an LSAT question (LR and RC).

    2
    Thursday, Aug 8, 2024

    Love to hear this!

    0

Confirm action

Are you sure?