- Joined
- Jun 2025
- Subscription
- Live
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
@EthanO I think the issue lies on the level of proof we need for this kind of question. While some questions like MSS or strength require that it be 100% correct, where we only need to 'contribute to a resolution' just needs to suggest the answer if not the answer itself. So while C does not guarantee a resolution, it opens a new set of questions that would (so it implies a possible resolution).
I haven't studied since I last took the LSAT in Jan this year, and thus I am unsure if my analytics reflect my current understanding.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
@rositamoro I just sent a request via chat. Hope to talk with you on discord!
I was wondering if anyone would be interested in regularly going through 3-5 star CausR and CondR questions. I have bee stuck at ~170 for a while now because of them and was hoping that maybe just talking to someone might help raise both our scores.
I live in the Phx area, so I guess most interaction would be digital.
Thank you for your time and I hope you have a great day!
Edit: Here is a discord link for anyone interested: https://discord.gg/tMr4A2wN
C is absolutely wrong (at least both the 'increase' and the 'enhances scientific rigor' parts are baseless).
D only makes sense when you realize the (unreasonable) position attributed to them based on the 'CAN' and not 'must'. So when we take that to be wrong, we end up with D, that they cannot gather data in a objective matter.
I don't like this question.