Since when was cultural trends considered fashion???? THIS QUESTION STINKS

What's annoying is I totally identified the flaw. I would have gotten this question correct if it wasn't for those hidden referential phrases!

I eliminated E because of the word likelihood. Just because i'm more likely to drink water because i'm thirstier than you doesn't mean i'm going to drink water. So AC E requires you to make the assumption that this likelihood leads to an expected outcome. No likelihood ever leads to any outcome unless the stimulus states it leads to that outcome. The stimulus does say this outcome occurred, but it doesn't say it was because of this likelihood. Any question that requires you to make an assumption in MSS is most likely wrong.

Your explanation for C is way off... Not even close to explaining it.

Every living being including bugs, humans, and other animals need water to survive. This is something LSAC would reasonably expect you to know, therefore assume. If every bug needs water to survive and a field of grass only has certain areas with a higher percentage of water than it is fully reasonable to assume the bugs will be searching for water in these areas.

When bugs are hungry, they search for food. They don't search for food on some random spot, they search for food near an ant hill where there is actual food or on a plant with leaves where there is actual food. When a bug is thirsty, they don't search for food in the desert, they search for food where there is water. Well this field has certain areas where water is more abundant, so it's reasonable to assume that these bugs are searching for water in the area where this vital resource is more abundant. Thus the fairy circles are formed.

That's why I picked C.

Wow, what a boring and difficult passage.

Sheesh

Answer choice E strengthen the argument.

What is it we are trying to weaken? THE FACT THAT THESE VITAMIN PILLS WILL REDUCE THE RISK OF A. DISEASE.

E say what? Alzheimers increases level of histamine in the blood.

Okay so it increase the level of histamine in the blood. You then take these pills and now your level is back at baseline. Well guess what? Those who didn't take the pills still have high levels of histamine in the blood.

This literally strengthens the argument.. Did anyone else think of it this way?

Can someone help me with E? If experts were consulted, it implies that the city contracting the experts have received affirmation that they NEED the street sines for x, y, and z. Therefore, this would explain to me whether or not the street signs is a waste of money. If the experts say we need it then it was not a waste of money, if they weren't consulted than we have no way of knowing if it is a waste of time or money.

I feel like E really hits the spot. Answer choice C employs the same exact tactic as answer choice E. So I get why C is right, but I don't understand why E is wrong.

20/27 :) Heck Yeah.

Question 17: You MUST understand the author is saying --> " I purpose the primary motivators" to get this question correct. ASK yourself what motivators could lead to a path in the woods? NONE of the answer except E would touch on this.

I'm not sure what I like more, more implied or explicitly stated reading comp questions. They are both just as scary in my humble opinion. Ugh.

If you don't know the definition of prolific you will get this question wrong. Prolific writer = Someone who writes a ton.

I thought prolific writer meant "great writer". So I didn't choose AC A because I couldn't determine whether Bachs contemporaries were "Great writers".

D logically makes the most sense.

Stimulus is literally telling us you MUST accept one of three thing.

1, 2, or 3

Answer choice D is telling us any two people will probably use two different approaches.

Well as it stands based off of the three options the odds are 33% that a person will pick 1, 2, or 3. Therefore it must be true that two people who attempt to solve a paradox will probably use different approaches.

How am I allowed to bring in the assumption that these two people are likely to pick the same thing. That's absurd.

I don't use conditional diagramming, as I believe that concept is not necessary to be able to understand the text. As a matter of fact the more I study conditional logic, the worse I do. My brain does not work that way. Can some PLEASE explain to me how from the following information below, we can conclude that (it is not possible to be both a bio major and a literature major).

Students (100)

70 of the students are taking FL and B together

Every student taking Bio is a bio major. Therefore 70 students are bio majors.

Based on this information. Some students (70 students) taking FL are not free literature major. Why? Because they HAVE to be bio majors since every student taking bio is a bio major.

Yo this question is absolutely cashews & almonds!

My problem with b is that just like how cultivated apples today are different in size from cultivated apples five thousand years ago, you would fully expect the same it true for wild apples. Wild apples today are probably not the same size they were 5,000 years ago. To assume they are the exact same sizes is a mistake that the author making the argument is displaying. Answer choice B does point out that he makes the mistake of thinking cultivated apples today are the same as 5000 years ago, but then it ironically does the exact same assumption with wild apples. This is why I negated B. I literally thought to myself (this is a paradoxical problem within a paradoxical problem). Wild apples today are significantly larger than wild apples of 5,000 years ago.

When answer choice b says "tend to resemble their wild counterparts" we are wrong to assume they resemble our "wild counterparts".

There is absolutely no way question 19 in not E. How is that even possible?

When I read passage A I immediately understood the author had a lack of understanding of what insider trading is, not only this in line 8 we learn he is not talking about the average investor but stock brokers. This is what his argument is built about.

When I read Passage B i immediately understood he's now talking about all traditional and regular investors.

Answer choice E in question 19 literally reflects this.

Out of all my answer choices which I got all correct on this passage, i was MOST confident in my answer of question 19. How is it possible it is not E. I'm utterly dumbfounded.

Q13.

AC D is literally a catalyst of the great migration. JY says it is a random alternative hypothesis when it is explicitly not. Line 10 states AC D is a Catalyst of the great depression. Therefore your analysis of why AC D is wrong is incorrect as JY "Assumes" this is a made up hypothesis.

The reason I think it's wrong is because the question stem is asking us for support of the authors analysis. Implying the answer won't be explicitly stated since we are supporting it via outside information. I was stuck between D and E and went with what IS explicitly stated and I fell for the trap. Supporting an analysis of a hypothesis is never going to be re-stating a premise of that hypothesis which is what answer choice D does. B on the other hand is OUTSIDE information that does support the analysis.

Outside information vs inside information is the trick here. I can't believe I fell for this. Noted LSAT.

19 is too much of a time crunch, i'd likely circle it and come back to it if I had time. Q22 seemed to be the easiest question for me, I suppose it's all the must be true drilling in LR that factored into this one. Lol

Imagine North America has:

10 rodent species, each with 100,000 individuals (totaling 1,000,000 rodents).

1 deer species with 200,000 individuals.

1 bat species with 150,000 individuals.

Here, (B) would be true because rodent species generally have large populations (100,000 each). But (D) would be false because the deer species has the largest population (200,000) of any single species.

This is probably the hardest LSAT question I have ever seen. It makes absolutely no sense to me.

11 - E; We do know what material that Gray used structurally for its superior strength (The hard drying liquid used in lacquer (line 10) (presumably resin) and it was used decoratively for it's visual interaction on all the other material she applied it on. Bowls, screens, furniture, etc.

I understand why answer choice C is right, but I'm a bit confused on how this answer choice is wrong.

Wow, not only is the assumption extremely difficult to find. The answer choice doesn't even tell us the assumption being made. It gives us a scenario if applied to the argument that would make the assumption being made invalid. That's a super tough find.

but A can't be true if they demonstrate extenuating circumstances. #help

AC A gives us no information pertaining to the homeowner. What about the homeowner who did demonstrate extenuating circumstances. A can't apply.

Is perilously a common word the LSAT expects its test takers to know? Asking for a friend

If you don't know the definition of the word perilously, the LSAT will dock you -1 point pretty much. Sounds fair.

#9.

Line 50 tells us "relieving pressure on ocean fisheries" is and means "reducing fishing efforts".

The question asks us to find the closet meaning of "relieving pressure on ocean fisheries" aka "reducing fishing efforts"

c- Causing fewer wild fish to be caught

d- reducing the amount of income to be earned from ocean fishing

AC D is closest to this definition. I don't understand how it could be C. #help