I have gone through all of the LSAT questions. Do you think I should ask AI to make me some new/fresh ones? How reliable will those be if I upload old LSAT exams for AI to base the questions off of?
- Joined
- Jun 2025
- Subscription
- Core
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
Whenever I find an answer I like, I tend to ignore the following answers (I read them, but don't give them fair weight in my evaluation). How do I avoid this?
There is already a Most Recent feature on drills but I always want to redo the questions I had seen the longest time ago so I have to scroll all the way to the bottom. Can we add a Least Recent feature to make this easier?
The only thing necessary for A is B
The only requirement for A is B
All that is needed for A is B
Do these all indicate bidirectionals?
Hi! Does anyone know any good YouTube videos on how to get better at conditional conclusions specifically?
How do we know that "recent evidence suggests this view is mistaken"is the MC and not the Sub-Conclusion?
How do you know when to draw out implicit premises in questions like this? #help
@Elijah_Mize Does "is any" "is all" "is each" etc, all indicate bidirectional (basically "is + sufficient indicator")?
I've seen a few problems with the implicit assumption. How can I recognize when an implicit assumption is present? @tutor
Can someone reexplain why A is wrong? For the example he gave in the video: "Smoking tends to cause lung cancer" and an AC that says "many people who smoke don't have lung cancer," in my mind that would weaken the arg. While that is not a strong weakener, I don't understand how it is considered to not weaken. In that same sense, how is A not a weakener? @LowriThomas
Thanks!
@JoelKeenan Hi, why can't we read the either/ors as conditional statements though to evaluate whether A is true or false? #tutorhelp
Can someone expain how, if you write A out, it still proves false:
A:
OPTION 1: econ weak ---> /invest decreasing (original conditional proves this is false)
OPTION 2: invest decreasing ---> /econ weak (contrapositive conditional DOESN'T prove false)
Can someone explain this better for me?
Hi! I received a 161 on my first LSAT. I am trying to figure out if I should cancel my score. I have the whole year to study (applying to the 2026 cycle), and aim to get in the 170s. In the eyes of a T-14 school, is a 161 worse or better than a cancellation on my record?
Thanks for guidance!
Hi! I received a 161 on my first LSAT. I am trying to figure out if I should cancel my score. I have the whole year to study (applying to the 2026 cycle), and aim to get in the 170s. In the eyes of a T-14 school, is a 161 worse or better than a cancellation on my record?
Thanks for guidance!

The assumptions explains that you want to target weakening the assumption that Anger causes HB. Can we also target the assumption that HB causes HD by reversing it or saying that something else causes both of them? @tutor