@Marin.Arvin This is exactly why I did not choose B too. I think this question wanted us to explain a causal relationship for both phenomenon instead of introducing another correlative variable. B is the only one that offers a causal explanation for both phenomenon.

@c2124 I think this is where the LSAT is trying to get us to add in our knowledge of the world to supplement the arguments gaps. I also got tripped up by D because all we know is that packaging is (loosely) necessary (but not sufficient?) to commercial success. I failed to recognize that not meeting expectations is the same as leaving indicators of a products qualities in its packaging. Its sort of a negative assumption that if a product is not mentioning its benefits than it is giving a false expectation that those benefits are not present (which is an assumption on the consumer?) Overall I think it makes sense but I think its a bit of a jump to assume that not mentioning something is to create a false expectation of that thing. Once again, this really highlights the M in MSS because of all of the relative answer choices D is the only one that really deals in the world of consumer expectations in relation to product packaging.

@zahrachaudhry I also chose D. I think what was confusing is that the stim did not mention what any of the problems were. All it gives us is that there are an x amount of problems that result from the phenomenon. Looking back, D introduces an idea that is not present in the stim (trade imbalances). Whereas C specifically ties the two ideas of agricultural ideas previously produced (scarcity) with the problems created by urbanization (migration from rural areas). All we need is a majority or 'many' of the problems be associated with scarcity for the argument to be strengthened (honestly, even 'some' would z. I think in the core lessons they state that answers in strengthen questions can be "too strong" or "too weak" and still be right. If I said "Scarcity is central to all/some of the problems" the answer would still be right because it strengthens the argument (whether it offers a lot of support depends on the strength of course but its relative to other answers.)

@JacobA04 I also picked E, and what I noticed is that the result in the 'resolution' was not directly applied by Zachary. It introduced a 3rd party (psychotherapist), whereas the stim is talking about 'one' both anticipating, acting, and being the direct mechanism of success. Also, in E no specific 'evidence' was mentioned (I think LSAT was trying to bait us into assuming that his 'hoping' was based on evidence in support of resolving marital difficulties.) Furthermore, looking back on it C is the only one that really has an actor (Betsy) who obtained evidence (overhearing recommendation) and applied that for a separate entity's benefit (daughter) and succeeded. Its interesting because C also introduced a 3rd party, but does it in a way that does not remove the actors ability to trigger the causal chain (evidence -> belief in benefiting other -> preforming act -> succeeding) whereas E interfered at the preforming action part (persuading to go to therapy is not the same as facilitating the therapy thereby causing resolution.

Ok, this question hurt my head. After reading it over and over again this is how I figured it out. Firstly, the subset of Marvel Cars grew within the superset of Calistan while Calistan's 'bubble' stayed the same size. Then, during the emission standard period Marvel Cars subset 'bubble' stayed at its peak size while the overall Calistan 'bubble' grew. This means in plain terms, that during the period of emission standards the overall Calistan market grew in size. Which means, inherently, that the total monthly sales of cars had to increase which is the opposite of what A says. Really hard question in my opinion.

This one was tricky but remember that "many" can also mean "all" and the conclusion was referring to "some". Almost got stung by the trap but evaded by using the NEGATION TEST.

@MINNIE Same, went about double over time with lawgic, but I think while learning accuracy > speed. Glad it helped you too!

@MINNIE Hey, it was not till I took a little time breaking down the questions into Lawgic that I was able to get them all right. Maybe that will help you too. GL