Answer (E) explains the trend but not the increase. Not a very good answer but stronger than answer (D).
Answer (D) states a basic principle of journalism is to inspire debate. This answer, similar to (E), does not explain the increase, but it also does not explain the trend. While not verifying the truth of quotes could lead ot debate, it could also lead to less debate.
If we stay in budget this year we will not stay in budget next year. We have to renovate either this year or next.
If the only way to stay within budget this year is to not renovate then...
stay within budget this year ---> /renovate this year ---> /stay within budget next year
This is the sufficient assumption. That this years budget cannot cover the renovation.
We know the renovation is too expensive for next years budget, what if this years budget is even smaller.
Answer (D): The museum will exceed this year's budget if it renovates this year.
So in the future assume "vast majority" means at least ~80% and not at least 51%?
I didn’t even realize until I checked my email this morning. Thank you!!! 💗💗🎉
As many have noted LSAC is changing a lot of things about the LSAT interface and many have ascribed this to LSAC fighting score inflation. How possible is it that the August LSAT will be much more difficult than PrepTests 140-159?
If it is much more difficult will schools take notice?
If this wasn't the experimental section, answer (C) would be wrong for talking about nobles and merchants when the stimulus only makes a conclusion on peasantry. But maybe I'm out to lunch 🤣🤣😭
@YeniseCamacho I don't have any specific advice, but if I get questions wrong, especially if I get them wrong in the BR, I write long explanations of why the answer I chose was wrong and what makes the correct answer right in a journal.
@ObeidaHamish I started with a 155 I believe. I've been studying consistently since the beginning of this year. Jan-Apr I was doing the 7Sage core curriculum, now I'm just trying to focus on full prep tests, or prep tests w/out the experimental section since I've got an accommodation.
Second time doing this question, I got it right but only after realizing that "whoever loves anyone" does not mean "whoever loves at least one person" and instead means "whoever loves everyone." Is my grammar wrong?
Doesn't answer (E) rule out the alternative that the female was swimming to the side that had more orange because thats what they liked to see? Regardless, the question stem says which provides the most support and A is definitely stronger than E.
Having to assume the mid ocean ridge is in the middle of the ocean because of the word mid is so outrageous. Scientists constantly name their theories and discoveries in nonsensical ways (coming from a STEM student)
In the stimulus it is stated that the subjects guessed correctly less than half of the time. Maybe I am interpreting it wrong but it sounds like every subject did this. I chose answer (A) because I mistakenly thought that one of the subjects always guessing top would contradict every subject being wrong half the time. But that is not a true consequence of answer (A). When taking answer (A) simply as a what-if statement, it's easy to see why it does not have to be true.
I ruled out answer (B) because it is not tied to the stimulus. Answer (B) is very general and therefore coming up with a scenario to rule-it-out is simple.
Answer (C) does not have to be true because let's say of the 100 images on the computer screen, 25 were at the bottom, for the first 50 there could have been a reasonable pattern of one top, one bottom, top, bottom.... (though this is statistically unlikely).
For answer (E) I asked myself what does "rational" even mean in this situation? Wouldn't it be rational to guess top, bottom, top, bottom, if the first 50 followed that pattern?
Let's say answer (D) is not true, the subjects never guessed the next image would appear at the bottom of the computer, but were incorrect. That means the subjects either always guessed top or when they guessed bottom they were correct. We know the subjects did not always guess top because they were correct less than half of the time. If the subjects were always correct when they guessed bottom, they can only incorrectly guess top when it was bottom. Lets say off 100 images, 49 were bottom. The subjects guessed bottom 10 times and were correct each time. That leaves 39 images they could get wrong, and guarantees an accuracy above 50%.
Don't have to see this as a necessary assumption/conditional question. View it as needing to ensure it is CAUSATION and not CORRELATION between the Natal grass cycad becoming endangered and the caterpillar sharing the same fate.
@Optimusbladerunner I'm a bit confused. The correct answer says high GPA and the question stems says the participating students experienced an increase in achievement levels. For C to be the right answer, don't you have to assume high GPA is an achievement level?
Improved achievements, I suppose, = higher GPA. Thought that was an assumption I couldn't make, but it makes sense now.
Action some of its consequences.
If morally right = best consequences, then no situation can we know what action is morally right.
Best consequences can never be known. Best consequences are never known because only every know SOME consequences. So to know best you need to know more than some.
Answer (C) is even stronger than this.
I read this as it would be unrealistic to make works of fiction if writers followed SJ's advice. The stimulus is saying fiction would not reflect reality (or be unrealistic) if all the bad guys were chopped. It must be that some bad guys in real life have attractive qualities if its unrealistic to not portray fiction as so. C is very strong, but that works for sufficient questions.
My reasoning for picking B was the correct reasoning, that the author fails to consider that judgements of taste can be objective (objective means everyone agrees). I picked B because I didn't like any of the other answers, its easy to see that objective wouldn't mean that everyone agrees. I need to remember that "takes for granted" on the LSAT means "makes an unwarranted assumption about..." after remembering that, C is the perfect choice.
I guess when you negate C ( it is not true that different corporations have different core philosophies), even though all existing corporations have the same core philosophies, it does not stop it from being true that by having a new philosophy, you wouldn't not be considered a new corporation different from all the others.
Lipoprotein (a) could be a permanent, though nonharmful, change in the body associated with higher consumption of salt. Therefore, changing your diet could still lower heart disease risk while not impacting lipoprotein (a) levels.