what exactly are literary agents? I think that tripped me up because in mind I thought well authors are demanding more a cut

@jessicakoh93812 I chose d as well, I took that the bias against them could be understood as minority societies succumbing in every aspect....

I chose b.) because I assumed immediate successors WAS Parry's son.... why would he not be??

I chose A.) initially because in the last paragraph they talk about how tokens got replaced by clay tablets because these envelopes could better represent "mature writing" so to me that means tokens were not capable of at least representing some abstraction/quantity....

Can someone explain to me?

@MayaVM Since when does reduction = not highest?

I don't see this relationship at all; for example you buy a reduced priced rolls Royce, doesn't mean its no longer the most expensive car... see my line of thinking

I dont see how in answer choice E.) saying reduced price ensures not the highest bid...? Relative to what? What if the reduced price is still the highest bid??

Answers B and C honestly seem the same to me, I don't get why C is wrong...

I thought R was the book reviewer.... anyone else

For number 5 I still think answer d is wrong.... because more eggs hatching does not mean that they will survive their environmental hazards.

what if a lot of eggs hatch and all get eaten still? C seems more correct because one possible way does not take away from almost impossible (not impossible)

I still think d is not most strongly supported! Because even if more eggs hatch they can still die???

For question 4, answer choice D.) it also includes is an elitist which to me makes it wrong... This is because he connects democracy and regard for high masses but anyone does not have to be an elitist.

Can anyone confirm this? I did not eliminate for conditional logic reasoning (suff - necc)

@EthanPerlmutter I guess I was making my own assumptions that if one is producing oxygen it would in a way "cancel out" more generally

@jennawiese I think it comes from a source attack but is not directly saying it because the lsat writers are trying to confused us.... so instead of saying attacking his past is irrelevant, they say this issue only regards the future (not the past - which relates to his past actions)

Someone please help me why did he change the conclusion to rising blood pressure..? I am so confused it says lowers blood pressure

@Shannell_E'llan I was wondering the same why does the conclusion point to rising BP...? was it an error

but if its contributing more oxygen than the rainforest how can it be reducing oxygen in the atmosphere ??

@Reddrum0911 Agree

@MayaVM Option A baited me....

One thing that stumped was the fact that the correct answer never said Celia was a reasonable person.... I think I misread the sufficient condition in the principle. I took it be about being a reasonable person, but it's actually about how the policy is written... did anyone else feel like this? am I correct in this explanation?

@deji This was so helpful, I did not catch this!

I am confused when you do the contrapositive because are you not negating both "Not be funded" AND "there's fewer than 50 people" because its changing from "funded" and "not fewer than 50 people"...?

I picked E.) before watching the whole video I think the common words "patient privacy" tricked me because I also saw it earlier when they said "a patient wishes to keep private"

For #2, what would be the English translation of the contrapositive: /(endangered by impacts from space) → /(planetary society)