@Marcus Tsang My plan is to create a quizlet and drill myself on all of this. thanks for your reply

@Kevin Lin thank you.

how are we supposed to distinguish between answers that restate evidence (that are incorrect) and then answers that restate the passage that are correct? Can that be inferred from the question type?

what does expresses the conclusion drawn by the argument as a whole even mean? Thats what tripped me up i knew it was between C and D, but wasn't sure if we were supposed to incorporate evidence because it says as a whole. Had it just said conclusion i would have easily picked C. I realize now that D is an assumption, but nonetheless, the question wording ive noticed in unnecessarily difficult as if the stimulus isnt already difficult enough smh.

how can A be wrong if it says that ppl who pariticpated in annual spring cleanup got a certificate and then some of those ppl were not active in artisitc circle. Doesnt that logically imply that some could have gone and thus got a certfificate? I get that some can mean all, but how could a sentnece reading 'at least some' indicate anything but that some did show up?

I understand how most and some can mean all, but my concern is this: one common trap on the lsat is 'beyond the scope of the argument', which often includes statements that cant be inferred from the text. Often the indicator is that it will say "all" or make an incorrect overgeneralization. How would understanding some and most in this way help at all with the lsat?

@ColeCavanaugh thanks

i get how some can mean all, but how does this help with lsat questions. I feel like from my limited experience, rarely are lsat answers with 'All' correct because they are too extreme.

@Luis Allen couldnt agree more. i have no idea what they are saying. The reality is we have never looked at anything like this before. It almost seems like they are making it into some sort of strange formula and its counter-intuitive to how a normal person reads

im confused you say pick either idea and make it necessary condition. I figured that in conditional logic, the hardest part was confusing sufficent with necessary clause. How can we just pick either idea, when one is the sufficient (trigger) from a nesseary result?