Like many, this is one of my weaker points. It's been a focus throughout my studies and I feel like I'm finally understanding and getting more accurate! I know how to recognize SA vs NA questions, but it's not making sense to me how these questions differ in the answer. For example: "Which one of the following is an assumption necessary for the critic's conclusion to be properly drawn?" I am able to bridge the gap and connect the points, which is getting me the correct answers, but I don't see the answer as a necessary. An example is PT 126 Section 1. The answer is connecting B to C. Then the conclusion is C to D. So how is B to C a necessary vs sufficient assumption? Maybe I'm getting too in my head about it and the focus on finding and filling the gap is all I need to really think about. But open to any thoughts! And not able to pay a tutor $1000 to explain this question to me 🤪
- Joined
- Jun 2025
- Subscription
- Core
Maybe I've been studying too long, but this seems like one of the less helpful (dare I say least) explanation video that left me much more confused
K wow these first few lessons in this section are magic! I feel like I'm finally understanding!
While I appreciate the long in-depth explanations, sometimes it's hard because it doesn't show me how I can do this on the test. I can't do this whole drawing when I'm timed. #feedback
E makes perfect sense when I stop to think about it. There's something to be said for making assumptions before looking at answer choices, but there's also something to be said for letting the answers lead you and seeing what options they present. I read and eliminated too quickly.
I'm having a hard time understanding why B is wrong, and neither video explains it clearly. However, someone shared far down in these comments this idea that is helping me that I'm going to up here so you don't need to go searching "Answer choice B could be right if it says: Any number of people can utter some words without knowing their dictionary definitions. And that's just what the last sentence of the argument means." A key part of that premise is that they understand words they use!
In a similar boat. So frustrating to pinpoint. I will say, something I heard in the LSAT podcast today that I'm going to focus on is a lot of untimed reviews and keep writing it out because eventually, doing that will become 2nd nature so it doesn't take so long and we can even do it in our heads. So that's amazing that you know you are capable of those high scores!! you've got this!!
It's hard for me to get behind that E is the main conclusion
I'm finally understanding this woohoo! But it takes me a few mins. Is this a type of Q people are skipping? OR do you do it in your head? Or take the time to map it out when timed?
"The very absence of consensus within the expert clinical community is what makes clinical equipoise possible" from the first sentence of last paragraph is what makes A the correct answer.
How are you able to decide that a certain premise doesn't matter and ignore it?
So I got this right on BR, but the explanation in the video it's resent->imprudent and the way E is phrased makes it seem like it flipped those. Can anyone explain it for me? #help
#help Can someone point me to the lessons that discussed how to deal with the not (FT ->I) and how that becomes FT and /I?
i've been working on this a while tonight and I'm going to take a break because no matter how much I read the comments or re-watch the video, I don't understand how just supporting that "it's as important as he claims" is enough to satisfy the sufficient when "well written" is also a part of that premise. Any help would be greatly appreciated!! #help 😭
I'm having a hard time understanding why D is incorrect. If I take the contrapositive of D then L. rubellus and ferns can be together. And E still makes no sense to me :/ Any help would be greatly appreciated!
I got so caught up in the prompt that I forgot about the except gosh dang it. BUT the explanation video for this was GREAT!!
Can someone remind me where to find the lesson on dealing with the parentheses and "and" statements that's used in this question?
I'm confused because I thought that for parallel questions, it needs to follow the form of the example, and the example here had two premises. That's what pushed me to D.