5/5 im really proud of myself lets see if i can keep that momentum going as i get more seperated from these questions

that many and most trick coming up again

im being tortured by these writers

yall pick the most confusing concepts to not make into a video lol

@MRod thought the same thing. actually this comment told me that counterexamples cant have alternate explainations

omg who is the writer of this feeling like

i think this really needs a video but what from my understanding, and if someone can help me out please do, but i think how it works is that the some before some flaw thinks that it works similar to conditional chain. but this is wrong because some doesnt provide strong enough assurance to chain the conditionals together?

1/3 bc i didnt read many as some, lemme just only read many as some

omg it never ends does it lol

wait i actually get this am i about to crush the lsat?

@OliverJakacki this is also what i thought, she could just have an exceptional class that is different from the majority of other students

omg how was i supposed to know that the part saying "not just for its value as an investment" wasnt going to matter? like i eventually understood "not just" as meaning only for its value but it took me legit 15 minutes and talking outloud to get there

tried a second time and its like im getting worse

1/5 but im really tired and lowkey gave up on the last two

bruh i need to remember that only=necessary

im so proud of myself for understanding this ayy we getting there (for now)

this is nonsense

@CourtneyBraddock95 this helped me get it ty

i think im starting to get it

its over bruh this makes no sense to me

2/5 im a chud