is it possible to pick an answer that just feels right without understanding why it's right? that is me on so many questions.

@JosephTrischitta thank you!

I think the goal is to worry about understanding rather than timing first and then worry about timing later. I think that's my issue.

@ogreen26 yes, but if you do BR and get it wrong after getting it right normally then from what I understand you don't truly make sense of the logic.

do you guys watch the explanations or read them instead? cannot figure which is better?

my biggest fear is that once I get through all of the LR sections to practice, I bomb everything and I leave without understanding anything.

sometimes you wish all questions were like this, and then you get humbled so embarrassingly hard when you're on a streak

I swear

anyone else just lost

@kimwexler by chance, have you seen better call Saul? I noticed your name lmao

strengthening is definitely easier than weakening

I just skimmed through the answers and immediately picked c when I noticed that that answer had the opposite intended effect and just knew it was right. got it right with 52 seconds still below the goal!

@Twills well an argument is the premise + conclusion and in this case, it is asking for the strongest counter to his argument which means it is looking for a way to weaken the support between the phenomenon and hypothesis. The answer is A because it is an alternative hypothesis; the original hypothesis stated that magnets help reduce back pain, so by stating it is a placebo, it weakens the original hypothesis.

no need to watch the video or read the explanation for this one!

I hate that some questions seem so simple like this and others seem impossible.

sigh if only all questions could be this way :(

@LSAT1011 I believe it's something we just assume using real world knowledge that an expert in the field or topic would otherwise not make. It's a common trap for the questions.

Quickest answer I've gotten correct thus far!

@MaxSeltzerLaw it would be correct because the second question is asking which answer choice would best address the point at issue. The correct answer choice is saying that having cats as pets is a good thing and this is correct because tom would agree with this while Athena would disagree with this implicitly. With disagreement, you have to pick the answer choice that would show one person would agree while the other would disagree.

@AlexandraPolidora I think the idea is that when it comes to formal logic i.e. conditionals, then you cannot use outside information. On the other hand, for informal/ logic like causation and correlation, you can? I am assuming that when real practice shows up, then they will provide answer choices in which you have to decide whether they make sense in that particular context.

@brandenesrawi I think it would be: Most of America's almonds are grown in California. Most of America's almonds are exported to Brazil. Therefore some of California's almonds are exported to Brazil. The difference is that in the first sentence you are talking about America's almonds and in the second you are talking about the almonds grown in California. But I could be wrong

@Kevin_Lin this explanation helps a lot. Thank you!

got all 3 right!! only issue is I went above on time for all three but I'll take grasping this over timing at this moment!

the electric in #1 is what got me; when is it reasonable to assume that the adjective can be dropped?

@AlexisBeam mission to see how we do when we take our LSATS! Good luck!