- Joined
- Jul 2026
- Subscription
- Core
Admissions profile
Discussions
Read that sentence and genuinely said hallelujah before opening the comments.
I hate this answer because it doesn't even say that relocation is possible; it says PERSUADED. So, making it possible for qualified teachers to be able to be persuaded. I don't see how that could possibly guarantee the teachers actually moving and working for the region. But I guess in this section less is more.
#help... On Q1, I chose A because I thought the conclusion was "the main point of most criminal organizations is to generate profits." I'm not sure if I am just overthinking the SA section, but I have been increasingly confusing what the conclusion of an argument is. Any advice?
It seemed like the rest of the argument was trying to prove to me that the main purpose of a criminal organization was to generate profits
#help... On Q1, I chose A because I thought the conclusion was "the main point of most criminal organizations is to generate profits." I'm not sure if I am just overthinking the SA section, but I have been increasingly confusing what the conclusion of an argument is. Any advice?
#help...I chose A because I thought the conclusion was "the main point of most criminal organizations is to generate profits." I'm not sure if I am just overthinking the SA section, but I have been increasingly confusing what the conclusion of an argument is. Any advice?
Thought I was reading the Guiness world record for longest sentence, lsat writers are demons lmao
The public purpose of a hospital, being to help the community with their health, is quite an assumption based on how huge those medical bills can be
I accepted my defeat when choosing C because I saw the only if and because I never saw anything about "its intended purpose"
Luckily all the other answers were even worse
#help, for a question like this, that doesn't say which of the following IF TRUE... should we still grant all of the answers presumed truth?
Same, almost made me pick A but I couldn't pick an answer with "significant proportion" in it
I didn't even consider that one defendant wouldn't have a lawyer, I just thought, well the lawyer that counsels two of the defendants is going to be questioned twice 😐
Why can we not assume that the waste-to-energy plant can't offset the environmental impacts of increased trash production, but we can assume that the gas-fired plant cannot replace the incinerator?
Nope, I picked C too, I made the assumption that copyright influences authors unable to find publishers, which made it harder to make money. I thought that was a more reasonable assumption than E because kids/ family or whoever can still benefit even after the author dies.
I feel like sometimes it asks about reasoning and not the conclusion, but then the answer is directly related to the conclusion.
I chose B as the strongest answer. However, does anyone else find A to be strengthening? If exposure to metal causes resistance to metal poisoning and the same bacteria also resist antibiotics, wouldn't we expect that bacteria that isn't resistant to one to not be resistant to the other? sure its a Hypothesis with some assumptions, but I think that the correlation provides some support. Especially since the opposite would be that some bacteria are resistant to antibiotics but aren't resistant to heavy metal poisoning. That would totally weaken the argument.
I think that learning them back to back makes it more difficult because you get used to finding answers for the W questions and then its hard to shake that off and find the opposite.

A requires quite the assumption (the author's position), but I think D also requires quite the assumption as well; it just happens to be more relevant because she is opposing some people's reasoning for their view, but her personal view is silent.