Is it a good idea (time-wise) to maybe glance at the question stems before deciding which approach to take? (If the questions are heavy on B-passage content, then I would not choose this method.)

I am a bit confused about how we are predicting 1. how the passage is going to go and 2. what type of passage it is. What happens if you keep reading and the entire passage is actually about the colorists? It seems like we know that his passage is a spotlight passage so we approach it as one. But what about when we don't know? Each type of passage just feels so similar to me in practice that I am unsure of how to approach it. Anyone have any tips?

I have a question: does anybody else overthink the questions? I am so careful to not fall for a trap answer, I will eliminate the right answer because I am scared of a detail or maybe the wording of it. I guess that method of thinking was better for the LR sections than it is for the RC section. Does anyone have any tips for that?

I am confused about how this is relevant to the LSAT. It feels similar to the lesson on assumptions. Often when I am doing test questions, I find myself over-assuming things, and then I will course correct and UNDER assume things about the text given. I know there are levels to what makes a "reasonable" assumption or inference, but where is that line drawn?