I interpret this as the law protects people in their workplaces, so wouldn't they also be protected outside of their workplaces since every establishment an individual goes to would also be somebody else's workplace, and thus also subject to the ban? E is obviously correct since it MBF, I am just confused on C being incorrect still.

I don't think I really understood what was being asked here while working through it on my own....

+54 seconds and wrong lets gooooooooo

Anyone have tips on what you can do when you are completely lost even after watching the explanation and reading comments?

Man, I just really am not understanding this one even with the explanations for some reason.

Man, there is just absolutely no way my mind is going to separate something like "All descriptions of monstrous beasts describe violations of the laws of nature" from specifically monstrous beasts described in horror stories in the time crunch for the lsat. Diabolical

I interpreted "all their investments" in D as referring to all the investments they made in the tulips. As in multiple tulip investments. How would I prevent a mistake like this in the future as I didn't clock it was expanding to other types of investments and not just multiple investments in different types of tulips?

I got this wrong thinking it was C, but I see why D is correct now. Would this be a correct explanation for why C doesn't work?- Originally I was thinking that if they have never taken the pills, we don't know if the pills could be more effective, but the exact same reasoning is why this is the incorrect answer. They have not taken them so we have no clue if they would be more or less effective, so C can neither most weaken nor most strengthen the argument as all we know is that BM is most effective. I didn't really understand the given explanation for why C is incorrect, but as for why D is correct, I understand. Apologies if this is confusing or simply just an incorrect explanation, I am just trying to make sense of it the best I can. Let me know if this adds up or if I am a moron missing the point entirely!

I got this question before and just got it again in a drill and still went 0/2. Chat am I cooked, I literally have seen the correct answer before 💀

bruh

Dang I really wasted a lot of time thinking E was a trap answer since it seems so obvious. Should have had that in like 30 seconds not a minute and a half.

I'm just so lost as to why sometimes these make sense and other times they don't to me. This was incredibly easy and straightforward, however I have struggled with most other question in necessary assumptions.

Mine is saying not open until 10PM UTC???

I cant wait to get a comparative passage on the Lsat that doesn't have a single question fully solvable using the split approach. I can smell it coming.

I don't think this method is for me, but I will give it a shot and see!

I was ballin till the last 2 questions...

oh, ok

welp, that was incredibly easy when watching the videos and incredibly difficult when on my own as usual...

Zero shot I am going to be able to do this in the necessary amount of time

First of these I have gotten on time and its a level 1. Very cool.

I really don't know what has happened to me here. The first few were incredibly easy and straightforward to me but I was so lost and confused on the last 2.

So far these have been pretty straightforward for me but this one really tripped me up for some reason.

well well well, if it isn't our old friends sufficiency and necessary again

Went over on time but this process has been the most straightforward and easy to apply for me. Just gotta get a little quicker

I immediately chose D after see the most-most-most format repeat and that was a mistake. Always read to make sure its actually following and not just using the same language.