Can someone explain why the correct answer choice is A for PT 9, Section 2, Question 20?

The correct answer is A-fails to rule out the possibility that a true belief can have deleterious consequences.

While the AC by itself is reasonable, I am just not seeing how it is a flaw in the argument's reasoning.

I identified the conclusion as the first sentence of the stem, is this where I'm messing up?

Hey 7Sagers,

Here's the official April 2023 LSAT Discussion Thread.

REMINDER: Under your Candidate Agreement, you may not discuss the details of any specific LSAT questions at any time. For the April 2023 LSAT, general discussion of what sections you had, or how difficult you found a given section, or speculation about which sections were scored or unscored, is prohibited until after 9pm ET, Tuesday, April 18th.

Posts that violate these rules will be taken down and may result in disciplinary action from LSAC. Let’s work together to ensure the test is fair to everyone, and not share information before everyone has taken the test.

Some examples of typical comments:

✅ The following comments are okay 🙆‍♀️

❌ The following comments are over the line 🙅‍♂️

Good luck to everyone taking the April 2023!

**Please keep all discussions of the April 2023 LSAT here!**(/red)

How did you guys determine C was the answer for PTB S1 Q23

Hello!

Could someone please help me figure this AP question out? There's no explanation video for it. The median score of someone who got it right is a 173, and I am aiming for a 170+.

Stimulus: "One can be at home and be in the backyard, that is, not in one's house at all...."

Question Stem: "Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship between the argument's conclusion and its claim that one can be at home without being in one's house?"

Answer Choices:

A. (not correct)

B. (not correct)

C. (CORRECT)

D. (not correct, this is the one I chose)

E. (not correct)

Admin Note: Edited. It is against our Forum Rules to write out the entire LSAT question and answer choices on the Forum.

Could someone explain why the correct answer is C? I am so confused

Can someone explain how D is the correct answer to PTB S1 Q16? Is it correct because it simply has no impact on the argument?

I would like to see a video breakdown of this question

Admin Note: Edited titled. Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"

My proctoru indicates I have no break in my test in the rules, I thought we got a 10 minut break after section 2?

Does anyone know why the correct answer is D?

With the April LSAT only a week away, I wanted to wish everyone who's taking it the best! I'll be taking it for the third time on the 14th and am getting pretty nervous lol For anyone who feels similarly, don't worry, think about all the time you put into your preparation, it will carry you through to the end!

Hi Friends,

I built an app for myself that randomly generates arguments in the different valid and invalid forms we learn in the curriculum. The actual text is business and financial jargon; I tried to mirror the LSAT in terms of content. Anyway, if this would be useful, I can put it in the cloud so others can play with it!

I recorded a demo in the link below.

https://www.loom.com/share/519db74df8ab4eb781c6b95b72e85050

I am barely getting these questions correct and i am about to give up. Could someone please tell me your methods for approaching these questions cause negating isnt working for me.

I have been missing -4 pretty consistently on LR for a long time. I started around -6, been studying for about 3 months. I know I can get my LR down to -2. Anyone been in this situation have any tips?

Looking to help out a few people who are finding it difficult to improve in Logical Reasoning. If LR feels like your cryptonite and is bringing down your overall score, dm me.

Hi all! I am really struggling to understand why B is incorrect. I know now that D is the right option, but I'm not sure how to structurally identify why in other LR sections. I'd appreciate any help/explanations!

Does anyone how I can improve on weaken questions? I really having a tough time with them.

I understand you have to weaken the support the premise gives the conclusion, but how? Am I questioning the premises? Is there something I'm looking for? Do I say, what if it's something else?

How do I weaken the support? In what ways???

Why is D correct when it says opposing views are discussed 'briefly". #help

why is it not required to block out that Mayor Drabble could repay her debt to Lee immediately in some other way? Why is the temporal aspect more important by the stimulus? Was stuck between A and E. #help

Does anyone write down the board for the acceptable situation question 1? I feel like this could potentially help on future questions to show a could be true answer or something similar. Or is this too risky in case you get it wrong?

I encountered a question with an answer choice that said something like "companies are no more likely to do X if B than if A"

This feels like a riddle to me, and I am not exactly sure what relationship is established here. My best guess was that this means that if B, then X is either the same level or less likely than if A. Is that correct or is there a better way to interpret this relationship?

I came across a question (PT58, S2 Q19) that had a question stem like the one above and JY's explanation raised a question for me. Does a passage only provide support for the author's arguments? In this passage, the author is refuting a legal theory, so is it wrong to say that the passage is providing support for the opposing theory in any way?

P.S. I would've asked under the passage, but the last comment was 10 months ago. I guess I'm the only one with this problem lol.

Does anyone know of a good way to practice dissecting the different parts of an argument in a question stem? For example, J likes to highlight, circle, label P for premise & C for conclusion, call out context & referential phrases, key words like thus, therefore, etc. I feel like I need practice with this. Does anyone have any suggestions? Do you print out a bunch of questions and practice that by hand? Is that a helpful thing to do?

Hello, I have been struggling with my timing and accuracy on reading comp.

When I move slow throughout the questions and passage, I tend to do much better with the questions (obviously). I will usually get all the questions right for easier - medium passages/questions, and only 1 wrong for harder passages.

My biggest problem however is that is takes me awhile, and usually in the 35 minutes I can only get through 3 of the passages. I have attempted speeding up my reading / time in questions to reach all 4 passages but my accuracy in questions severely drops in where I may get 2-3+ wrong per passage.

I have gotten much better at low res summaries, and I find that method helpful especially for structure questions.

What is the best way to speed up while maintaining accuracy? I have read previous discussion forums in where people only focus on the 3 passages and leaving the 4th passage for guesses. I have experimented with this method and i usually do way better in terms of accuracy (getting around 18-20 correct, vs 12 - 15 correct). I do recognize I sometimes waste time by checking answers in the passage when I am fairly confident in my memory however, I can't seem to trust it (as every now and then I check to find out my memory was wrong).

Any help / recommendations is recommended, thanks!

Hi

PT 76 S2 Q19 AC (D) is not a flaw because the author does not presume that the argument it cites is the union leaders' only argument for their view while PT 25 S2 Q12 AC (E) is a flaw because a reason not mentioned in the stimulus is not considered.

Both of the arguments do not contain phrases such as "the only reason why..." and yet they seem to give me contradictory responses. How do we know when premises are the only reasons why the author comes to the conclusion in an argument where there is no mention of the reasons being the only reasons?