on number 5, why isn't the part about what language requires a conjunction?
Hi! What is the best way to do a wrong answer journal? How do I turn why an answer is wrong/right into a generalization about what I shouldn’t/should do when answering LSAT qs? (For RC and LR)
Should I make a wrong answer journal for RC? If so, how should it be different than my journal for LR?
is it always the case that irrelevant answers on NA questions will fail to strengthen the argument AND fail to weaken the argument?
I have never laughed as much while studying for the LSAT as I have laughed from these videos. Thank you for making this such an enjoyable process and for being silly while teaching us :)
I wanted to ask a question here about what the video meant about the negative prescriptions... what about them? that part was so confusing to me
I am super confused on this question. the desert part in the conclusion is throwing me off. someone please explain this to me
how did you know that there is overlap in the techniques taught in short term and long term training based on answer choice E? how could you tell it was a subset and superset relationship?
how would you do this question if you do not know what "attrition" means?
I feel that I run into issues with not knowing the meaning of a word and then it impacts my ability to solve the question accurately.
I feel like a lot of my issues with these kinds of questions and other question types so far are coming from me not knowing what I read or not remembering what I read or me misinterpreting what I read.
any suggestions to fix this?
how do I know when I can equate /bad soil and good soil? I didn't equate them because there is possibly mediocre soil and because negation is not the same as opposite.
I was able to diagram the question properly but still had difficulty translating it into the correct answer. I did all the diagramming correctly but still picked the wrong answer.
Does anyone have any suggestions for this??
why is it the case that B could cause C and not a regular causal arrow (--c-->)?
one thing that I am still struggling with is how to make inferences from the stimulus that are reasonable.
I am also struggling with how to identify the assumptions made in the answer choices and the stimulus as well as the assumptions that I make for the stimulus and answer choices.
any suggestions?
what's the difference between an embedded conditional and a disjunction?? this feels the same to me as the example:
If M gets adopted, either O gets adopted or P gets adopted
M --> O or P
this may be a stupid question, but how do you even know if you have an embedded conditional from the English text alone. I can obviously identify it in its logic form given the parentheses, but I am having trouble with identifying it when it is in English...
could someone help? do you have any other examples of English text that contains embedded conditionals?
Also, would this be the case:
cat --> mammal
but NOT mammal --> cat
if someone said mammal --> cat, then this could be confusing sufficiency for necessity which is the oldest mistake in the book
is this correct?
@Kevin_Lin Hello, thank you for your response! I did want to follow up on this question and ask the following. The reason I hesitated to choose the AC that said language requires conceptual thought is because of that conjunction. I thought that, because the rest of the conditional diagram only pertained to one of the conjuncts, it wouldn't be accurate to choose the AC that said language requires conceptual thought. Why is it that we can infer this even though the rest of the conditional chain is only associated with one of the conjuncts?