HenryLehmann

Joined: Jan 2026
Subscription: Free

Admissions profile

LSAT

Not provided Goal score: 180

CAS GPA

Not provided

1L START YEAR

2027

Discussions

PrepTests ·

PT132.S4.Q26

HenryLehmann

Friday, Feb 27

How do we know based off of the stimulus that it isn't the case that say

older than 65: 26% malnourished, 12 % below poverty standard

65 or younger: 30 % malnourished, 40 % below poverty standard.

Obviously, real world knowledge makes this sound insane, but given the stimulus how do we know this isn't a possible outcome of the study?

PrepTests ·

PT111.S1.Q13

HenryLehmann

Friday, Feb 27

I am a little bit confused by J.Y.'s explanation. In his example people were told leaves are blue, but then even though they were told that was false they had received confirmation by going outside to see that it was true. Maybe I am misunderstanding but how can you receive confirmation that a belief is true based off of statements which suggest that it is not true? I'm a little bit in a mental pretzel after this one

PrepTests ·

PT114.S4.Q17

HenryLehmann

Friday, Feb 27

What is so hard for me about this question is that I have such a hard time shaking my real world knowledge that smoking is bad and so I view answer choice B as benefiting Dr. Han

LSAT

•

Wednesday, Feb 25

HenryLehmann

Making Efficient Use of Time in Practice Phase

I just finished the theory/core core curriculum today and am moving into the practice/drilling phase of my studying. For the theory I watched every video explanation for every question because I wanted to focus my time and energy on understanding the test. As I move into the drilling phase where I am turning my focus towards answering questions correctly and quickly I am wondering if it is still worth my time to watch video explanations even for questions I confidently got right. If anyone has any tips/suggestions on what has worked for them in the drilling phase please let me know! Thanks!

PrepTests ·

PT102.S1.P1.Q5

HenryLehmann

Tuesday, Feb 24

The use of the word "significantly" made me skeptical, but the other answers don't work at all so got there via POE.

Lessons · Spotlight Passage, Paragraph 1 (Kate Chopin)

HenryLehmann

Monday, Feb 23

Kevin went absolutely crazy for this one

Study Groups · Working Around A Full Time Work Schedule

HenryLehmann

Monday, Feb 23

Hey Carlos! Same boat here for me. Regarding timing of when you study and how much you study that is so dependent on your goals/life circumstances I will refrain from giving any advice there. What I will say is that 90 minutes of concentrated time is better than 3 hours of distracted study say at work or something like that. The other thing that has been essential for me is forcing myself to take the weekend off. Studying for this test is a massive mental workout and giving my brain recovery time on the weekends has been huge. And as another commenter mentioned focus on sleep. Limit alcohol and caffeine, eat relatively healthy if you can, sleep at consistent times, screens off an hour before bed. All that standard sleep advice has been crucial for me. Best of luck!

PrepTests ·

PT101.S1.P4.Q24

HenryLehmann

Edited Thursday, Feb 19

I have a question about answer choice D. I thought the example about the chi wara masks was being used to show that in some cultures the concept of authenticity cannot be applied. But am I wrong in that authentic and original do not mean the same thing at all?

Lessons · Weaken, Strengthen, or Evaluate Question (Late Heavy Bombardment)

HenryLehmann

Wednesday, Feb 18

Here is how I am thinking about this.

AC A, if true, could be reasonably used as a premise to support the conclusion: LHB limited to earth and moon.

AC D, if true, could be reasonably used to attack the premise used by the author to support the conclusion: /LHB limited to earth and moon.

Regardless of the fact that attacking a premise is not the same thing as weakening a conclusion, AC A is actively involved in supporting the conclusion that the question asks us to strengthen, whereas AC D is not. Tricky question!

LSAT · please help

HenryLehmann

Friday, Feb 13

I am by no means an expert, I have only been studying for this test for a little over a month now myself, so please take my advice with the biggest grain of salt ever, but considering where you describe yourself to be I wonder if "slowing down" is exactly what might be most helpful. Attending the live classes, re-watching the core lessons, focusing on grammar and the basics is probably going to be where you need to focus some attention.

Lessons · Lesson 1 - Houses on River Street

HenryLehmann

Friday, Feb 13

Me when I see it's a parallel-flaw question

Lessons · [OPTIONAL] Lesson 11 - Vegetarianism and Nutrition

HenryLehmann

Friday, Feb 13

Theodora argues the same way that political content creators argue nowadays

Lessons · You Try - Barn Owls

HenryLehmann

Wednesday, Feb 11

Why LSAT writers so obsessed with questions about dead animals and animal abuse

Lessons · Drill - NA Questions

HenryLehmann

Monday, Feb 09

NA is messing me up more than the other categories so far

Lessons · [OPTIONAL] Lesson 4 - Plant Trees to Store Carbon

HenryLehmann

Monday, Feb 09

I would have gotten this wrong because I didn't know what hasten meant lol

Lessons · You Try - Rational Consumer Behavior

HenryLehmann

Friday, Feb 06

@jessicapearson Imagine the following argument.

It is smart not to buy a house unless one expects to live there for at least ten years.

Therefore, Jim is smart for deciding not to buy a house.

What is missing here? The assumption that Jim falls into the subset of people that were described in the premise. It's not about supporting the argument per say, it's about showing that what was originally an unwarranted assumption required for the argument to be valid is in fact true.

Lessons · You Try - Sensibly Interpreting Promises

HenryLehmann

Friday, Feb 06

Sufficient Assumption questions feel tricky because the right answer always triggers the part of my brain that says "nope that would be too easy that can't be the right answer"

LSAT · headphones?

HenryLehmann

Thursday, Feb 05

@fmorea really? are those provided? That sounds great

Lessons · You Try - Marty's and Checkers Pizza

HenryLehmann

Edited Thursday, Feb 05

@AnthonyElHelou The conclusion of the professor's argument is about the motive of Checker's. The motive of a company appears in the necessary condition of Answer choice A and in the sufficient condition of Answer choice B. It's the oldest trick in the book!

Lessons · You Try - Unauthorized Access of Computer Files (PSAa)

HenryLehmann

Tuesday, Feb 03

The amount of text in the answer choices should be illegal

PrepTests ·

PT118.S1.Q14

HenryLehmann

Monday, Feb 02

My interpretation on the trap of answer choice B is that it is trying to bait us into thinking it fails L by getting us to assume that because 10,000 children have already been given synthetic HGH that if it were to to reveal important information about a medical condition it would have already been discovered therefore this study is not likely to reveal important information.

Lessons · Lesson 3 - Poverty and Malnourishment

HenryLehmann

Edited Monday, Jan 26

I have a sort of silly question, but given the stimulus on its own and not using any real world knowledge, how do we know that the percentage of malnourished people 65 or younger is lower than the over 65 group? If all we know about the 65 and younger group is that the malnourished % is smaller than the poverty % is it not plausible that for the 65 and younger group the poverty rate would be say 35% and the malnourished was 30%? If that is plausibly true then how do we know the four answer choices which would help to explain that folks 65 and younger are less malnourished actually explains the results of the study?

PrepTests ·

PT105.S2.Q24

HenryLehmann

Friday, Jan 23

@MaxThompson thank you! this was my exact frustration I was not taking into account the leftover from 1990

Lessons · Lesson 5 - West Calverton Pet Shops

HenryLehmann

Friday, Jan 23

I'm at a point in my studying where the logic here I completely understand, but the idea of working through a question like this in under 90 seconds feels impossible

Lessons · Chaining Causal Claims

HenryLehmann

Thursday, Jan 15

For the sake of logic and assuming premises to be true this makes total sense. I'm curious though about interpreting real world arguments where we don't assume premises to be true. Would it be the case that because there are assumptions built into each link of the causal chain that A –causes–> B is stronger than A –causes–> D?