@MacyHolcomb It's the false dichotomy flaw. In other words, "the result can be explained by either this or that" but didn't consider ANOTHER possibility exists. Search "False Dichotomy Flaw LSAT" and see what you can find. These questions aren't common but when they do show up, they are easy to spot such as this one.

The conclusion conflates a legal obligation with any type of obligation but the dead giveaway for me was "one is required to fullfill." That immediately triggered the necessary condition which corresponded to AC D.

How is this a 5/5? This is such an easy question.

@kateholthaus You may be over-simplying it incorrectly but I would need to see the exact example you are referring to. Ultimately, the answer is "it depends." It all depends on the directional flow of logic and I think that is where you might be getting sufficiency for necessity and vice versa, confused. Because A --->B---->C meaning A--->C or /C---->/A. In other words, variable A is sufficient for variable C to happen. But you might be thinking of A--->B<---C and in that case, A is not sufficient for C nor is C sufficient for A. Hope that makes sense.

Anyone else read AC A and immediately select that and submit the drill without reading the other ACs?

You're cooked if you got this wrong.

@Hfa Yes

Easy question and did it with 41 seconds remaining. Can't believe this was a 5/5 difficulty.

You don't even need to map this out. Just use your short term working memory and read the AC.

"Most" = 51 or more out of 100. Most students took each class meaning at least 51 or more students attended every session which automatically means, at least 51 students got a B- or above hence E, being the CORRECT AC.

@sarahmacrorie819 D isn't even partially correct though. D is saying it will increase in the coming years whereas the stimulus doesn't forecast this at all - again, an assumption the reader would make. The stimulus explicitly says it's a high number of middle aged people in the workforce (now) but makes no projection about future numbers - thus making the AC D, an easy one to eliminate.

For those newer to the LSAT, a great way to tackle "Point at Issue" questions is to use the highlighter feature to identify implicit differences between the speakers. The golden rule is that both parties must address the exact same concept for it to qualify as a legitimate disagreement. If Speaker A mentions a specific Topic X, but Speaker B never mentions it, you can be certain that Topic X is not the correct answer. To count as an eligible choice, both speakers must take a clear, opposing stance on whatever is being said.

Got it right but this is def a 5 star question

Those that read A and submitted the drill and BR without even reading the rest of the answers, gang -->

Easy 5/5

EZ PZ

@pamelajkok My argument is "most strongly supported" by the sheer amount of downvotes you received for your opinion. Probably the most downvotes I have ever seen on 7Sage! :)

Got it with 30 seconds to spare

@pamelajkok The fact you have been downvoted 69 fucking times speaks for itself.

@pamelajkok If words alone are enough to throw you off this much, the internet might be a rough place for you.

@colleenoleary77-1 It's not an insult but that's pretty wild that was your takeaway from this entire page. You somehow managed to find a way to victimize yourself. FWIW, there are going to be plenty of questions during your LSAT journey that might seem very difficult where you are forced to blindly place a bet, especially for new LSAT takers.

@giannabolla It's right above "Must be true."

@pamelajkok Imagine being triggered by words in general and you want to be a lawyer?

@pamelajkok Your comment is pretty "fucking" entitled.

The answer tried to trip you up with basic word play. They use "unlikely" in the conclusion but the correct AC has likely in it. Every word matters between the stimulus and the question stem.