@tigerlily There is no assumption to be made. The author has a clear argument.

Conclusion: Use another criteria instead of detection ratios.

BECAUSE

Premise: Businesses will go out of business and people will lose their jobs.

The author thinks that people losing their jobs due to a business being shut down is sufficient cause to use another criteria.

This one took me a second because of D but what helped me is the following.

I read the conclusion as "Must not spread, because you want enough food to be produced." Instead of a single combined conclusion, this allowed me to realize that the 2 conditionals are actually different. I was really leaning towards D because I thought it was incorrectly saying that just because the sufficient isn't occurring the necessary won't either. But, it's not doing this at all. It's not concluding that not enough food is being produced, it's just giving a recommendation.

@ConnerKline I have have issue with how the official explanation and you go about the conditional. You have Immoral & Public as part of the same sufficient condition. Wouldn't the conditional below align better?

If immoral -> [If public -> Offend] & Guilt

According to your conditional, answer choice A would not 100% be false. This is because A only includes one part of your sufficient condition, so according to your conditional there would still be some iffiness. If you say A is still correct according to what your conditional is, wouldn't you be committing a sufficient for necessary flaw?

@scastillo028 you can turn on private mode

@businessgoose The conclusion is telling you to ignore the rule for summer and stick to the winter rule. Answer choice E guarantees that you should stick with the winter rule because if there is ice then the turnover hasn't happened yet.

I get where you see the issue, but the argument is more so about which rule to follow.

@nishatmosphere The main flaw is that Lucinda being an engineering major does not equal her living in Western Hall just because most people living there are engineering majors.

See it like this: You are studying for the LSAT. At 7Sage most people are studying for the LSAT.

This DOES NOT mean you are using 7sage to study for the LSAT.

There are other services that you can use. This is the flaw the argument is committing. Now, the part that is tripping people up is choices A & E. The best way to go about differentiating them is to realize that the object in the argument is the "shopping mall" as the object in the stimulus is "engineering major." The structure you are looking for is Most A is Object. NOT most Object is A, which is what A does.

@lsat=psychologicalwarfare What AC did you have trouble with?

@steamboatwillie You don't need to assume important issues are taking place. We know that they CAN take place which is what we're working with. The author concluding that there must be at least as much freedom as people had in the public square doesn't require that assumption. If you're in the US you have the freedom to have a gun. That doesn't mean you have a gun, or that anyone has a gun. You have the choice though.

@ArdenAmarelo Yes, the question is easier to digest if you conflate high GPA with high achievement. It's not an unreasonable assumption to make in this situation.

@MATTIE No, it doesn't. Think of it as not being able to hear an angry person screaming at you. You can't hear the noise but the rest of their body is signaling anger visually (they're red, veins popping, moving erratically, mouth is wide, etc.)

That's kinda the same idea that C presents.

@Elecoo Kira talks about a specific insurance policy. Binh is very general when saying that a company making a profit doesn't imply that buying their policy is unwise. Binh is simply attacking the reasoning that Kira uses, they don't deny their conclusion.

This is a flaw in other LR questions. Bad reasoning DOES NOT mean the conclusion is false. It just means the way you got there is iffy. Here, all Binh is doing as I mentioned, is attacking the reasoning.

@Carrete

A gave me pause too, but what helped me eliminate it was accepting it as true. It is telling me that the part looks like the whole. D does not do a part to whole comparison, it does a part to part one. Comparing a seed to another seed.

@ANP Ideally fractals are modeled as infinite (computer generation allows this), so there is no end to it, it just gets smaller. The protrusion is dependent on how many cuts you make. In the Koch curve, you only cut the middle portion of the line and make one protrusion. Since you replicate this over and over, you only ever have one protrusion per section regardless of the length of the line.

@mikeross-jr If at least one traditional fish dies because they are too timid, then to an extent the experimental fish who are bolder have an edge. This must be true according to the conclusion. If there is not a single fish that dies from being timid, then from what the stimulus tells us, we cannot make the leap that having a bolder behavior means experimental fish have a greater chance to survive.

What helped me get this question was asking why the stimulus is concluding that the termites cause the circles. Why don't the circles attract termites? A gets to this because it tells us that the circle is newly forming, it's not done. Also, only the roots are damaged because of the burrowing.

@hsjung0923475 I don't see a large assumption being made. The ACs are treated as "true." Also, B weakens the argument because it opens the possibility that the independent company is not getting most of the service requests. We don't know the actual reality but it makes you question the conclusion.

To simplify this question you should be on the lookout for when categories are skipped. Going from large to small, young to old, fast to slow, etc. The stimulus tells us that small and medium companies don't get much money from banks anymore. Then concludes that TOTAL lending for banks is lower because of this. It does this without including large companies. Answer choice A brings large companies into the equation to guarantee the conclusion.

@beetbeet You're looking at the wrong conditional. The one you should be looking at is "However, if they occur frequently, the editor may modernize them." D, has the sufficient condition present. It does have the "interferes with reader," but this doesn't matter since the OG conditional from the stimulus only mentions one condition as sufficient not a combination.

This involves a bi-conditional which makes the conditional "unique" in that it goes both ways. If something is unique, then it is one-of-one. This means that the SC & NC can be flipped and no issue occurs.

This makes the conditional in the stimulus:

If genetic mutation substantial -> favored in natural selection

AND the other way around

If favored in natural selection -> genetic mutation substantial

E is the correct answer because it CANNOT be true according to the rule above. If a genetic mutation is neutral it CANNOT be favored, because "If favored in natural selection, THEN genetic mutation is substantial." Being substantial is necessary if you want to be favored.

B says "more good than harm."

@AmandaTesar6 You have the conditional backwards. It's = If uncomfortable, then not well designed. The contrapositive is = If well designed, then comfortable. Which then links to Spacious interiors.

@OwenTrela

You had to link the conditional in the last sentence. It originally says = If public place uncomfortable then not well designed, and all comfortable public places have spacious interiors. This doesn't link.

This can link by flipping the first half of the sentence = If well designed, then comfortable, then spacious. So, it must be true that a well-designed coffeehouse/restaurant is spacious according to the premise.

An easy way to think of this is flipping a coin. Just because you flipped heads the 5 previous times does not affect the chance of you getting tails.

@jbrodhecker Think MAGA

I think that RC is just one of those things that you need to grind. Do more and your baseline will start to get better. Also, don't skip on review. That's where you put the work in so that you perform when timed.