Now that we've completed this fun lesson, we have passed the "bar exam" administered by 7Sage. We are now fully licensed attorneys. See y'all in court! /j

I accept E as the answer. However, for my enrichment, how does it support the idea that the measures should be implemented universally? Does it lie within its over-inclusiveness? To me, all E says is to implement rules, but universally? Is it an assumption we have to make?

For whatever reason, I originally read it as the plaintiff requested to question a defendant without the defendant's own legal counsel there for a second, and I was horrifically concerned haha. Glad I reread it and managed to understand it better.

Even if we make "D" correct by saying the Whales have the characteristics that the dinosaurs did not have, is it still the best answer? I crossed out "D" because it was talking about the Whales (subset ) specifically, rather than the deep-diving mammals (superset) as a whole. I saw the whales as a subset, so even if the dinosaurs had dissimilar characteristics to the whales, wouldn't there still be a possibility that there were other deep-diving mammals without those characteristics similar to the dinosaurs?

And left no crumbs, Cabburkhalter.

You are correct if we were talking about the perspective of the corporations. Since we are talking about homeowners, I don't think the average person cares if the company is making more or if the government is getting kickbacks or benefits. Plus, it goes back to attacking the source of the data/push for the bulbs. I understand where you are coming from as a human, but the LSAT is not a human (probably a demon). It does not care. It does not want you attacking the source/premises in these questions.

I want to say I am the 45th, but idk if I like that number lmao.

I knew E was wrong, but the toxic side of my heart wanted it to be true. I love being petty.

Yes, that is why it is the correct answer. It directly goes against the stimulus that tells us the law does NOT ban smoking in people's own homes, regardless of whether others work there or not.

Honestly, for right now, focus on the material. You can do non-lesson drills after you finish the module, and you can hone in on time. But, to answer your question, I know the timer is ticking, so I ignore it! Personally, I take a deeeeeep breath with my eyes closed right before I start, and then I read everything at a good pace for me to understand. Taking a deep breath helps me a lot. It calms me and mentally prepares me to enter into a calm learning environment. When I see a question that is taking a while, I sit and try to figure it out. If not, then I flag it for BR.

As many as you like. For the lessons, one is sufficient. You can always go back and drill more either in this section or in their drill feature. You can build it how you like it by the question type (MC, MC-MSS, etc), how many questions, and how hard they would be.

While confusing at first, it is handy once you get to know it. You can also go to the setting and reset the preptest questions. The drills come from the actual preptests so there is a finite number of them. Resetting gives you a clean slate. You can do the same with the lesson's progress too.

Merely consistent with means it's unsupported - It can either be true or false. But do not get it confused with anti-supported either which are contradictions. We do not know enough information from the stimulus to say the answer choice is also true or false.

Example: "People who like ice cream are happier. The author likes ice cream." However, if the answer choice was to say "The author thinks the sky is blue," then it would be unsupported. You do not know if the author thinks the sky is blue from the statements.

The answer being "c" in the last three MC questions really has me stressed while working through them on my own lol.

I translated the stimulus perfectly, but I messed up and chose the wrong answer because I didn't realize I could translate the answers. I didn't realize the arrows were going in reverse. So simple but now is the time to learn. :)

The assumption I made was they did have a full script, but the actor merely memorized their part and maybe cues around their parts (hence the perfect speech that, I also assumed, they performed but nothing else).