Thought (D) could be viable at first in that someone who's below the curve for organizational skills, after attending the seminar, might just rise to the average level and thus not experience any major increase in their efficiency. I made a dangerous assumption, however, in that increases in organizational skills lead to increases in efficiency, and this severed link is exactly the mystery we're trying to solve here.

Therefore, (B) does nothing to resolve the paradox oof

Basically, the stim states that a guilty party should pay for their sins by giving up any profits earned via those sins.

(D) is the only other AC I left alive, and that's only because of 1) the future element of participation being withheld (similar to withholding profits) and 2) oh wait, that's it...there's nothing being offset here

(E) provides us with a guilty party having to give up profits because of their sins, neat

@LayanHamarnah My dumbass used (A) to weaken a conclusion that isn't even on the page: Therefore, a similar ban enacted at Highwater Lake would likely have the same result on the lake's fish population."

Cool, I can solve made up LSAT questions / reverse engineer the stimulus to fit my wrong answer! Friendly reminder to not make things up and instead focus on weakening the conclusion at hand.

GREAT HEAVENS a 2-star????

@alexfbaird do it — works wonders on the soul. Come back in 48 hours to a couple of untimed drills to grease the wheels

How is it that I can get this question correct in 60 seconds with no diagraming but flop on a 2-star Necessary Assumption ☠️

As soon as I read the opening sentence, I was really hoping we'd get an unrepresentative sample flaw

This one took me almost 4 minutes to see the part to whole flaw. I think I was looking in the wrong place, because after a couple of minutes, I realized that the part to whole flaw manifests itself in the idea that certification process probably contains difficult segments other than the "easy" written portion.

Took a solidddddd 5 min on this guy holy

This is one of the weakest explanations I've seen on an RRE smh. I thought about (B) for a while, and it made sense (more workers = higher chance of accidents), but it just felt so weak to me. Best helps to resolve, people...

@JoeMicsan "I think it requires some intuitive understanding also of what it means to encourage personal responsibility in adults..."

That last bit absolutely clicked for me. Kind of like knowing that having twinkies around the house is potentially problematic for kids but they gotta learn somehow. Too bad I had already forgotten about that portion of the stimulus by the time I got to (E)

RIP - I think most of the Qs I missed on this section I had down to two ACs after conducting POE.

@AutumnKelly9 yee

@jaydenca thought I’d pass an update:

It’s now been about 35-40 days since I completed the foundation modules and began my practice block. Here are some more (hopefully) helpful observations:

1) I stand by my previous observations, especially the untimed aspect. Turns out that the first phase of my practice block was centered on 100% untimed 5-10 question drills specifically targeted towards my weaknesses. I’m now wholeheartedly convinced that slow is smooth, and smooth is fast, and smooth is build through a solid understanding of what you’re doing. I didn’t believe it at first, but my speed has naturally increased over time. I like to think it’s because I spent countless hours refining my untimed accuracy, which allows for the remainder of the practice block to be spent honing test day strategies, pacing, target weaknesses, etc..

2) It’s important to trust the process. Even during the foundation phase, I was constantly asking myself “How can I possibly answer 25 of these within 35 min?” Like I said, most of this is just showing up and coloring — if you have the discipline to put in 1-2 hours everyday, it’ll come eventually. Big asterisk to this because you also have to be willing to commit to the wrong answer journal review process to fully understand what you’re getting wrong. Bottom line is that you’ll most likely make gains with consistency and taking a leap of faith in trusting the AI coach (oooooo scary)

3) A big example of “trusting the process” for me has been the transition from my untimed practice block to my first timed practice block. By the end of my untimed block, I was knocking out sections within (-4) accuracy, though it took me a solid chunk of time. Then I took my end-of-phase PT, and the score was - uh - not good. Really not good. Like lower than my initial diagnostic that I took at midnight on a whim and a 12 oz beer. Naturally, this concerned me, but since I knew I could solve this test to an 85-90% solution without the timer, I thought my primary issue was pacing. What I didn’t know was that all it took was an overhaul of how I approached my strategy to get a 7 point increase the following month. Instead of trying to cover all 25 questions, why not just focus on getting the first 15-18 correct. I didn’t get faster, I just took the feedback from the program and sent it. Two weeks later and I’m starting to see my speed increase while maintaining accuracy. In a few weeks, I’ll be able to push the boundary to the first 18-20 questions, and so on so forth.

LMAO a 5-star off rip is wild

@wendyzgod I found it useful to still go back and understand where my thought process went wrong — if you still can’t solve a problem with unlimited time, you’re definitely not gonna solve it under timed standards. I guess it’s not technically “BR” as much as it is hitting “submit drill” upon completion, skipping BR, then relooking the question through your wrong answer journal to dissect your mechanics.

Was like 3 minutes away from time’s up on my most recent PT — I went to guess on the last 6 questions or so and realized with 20 seconds left that I had really just eliminated those ACs 😂

Success on this question relies on your ability to keep track of the author's conclusion, which is that the asteroids actually strike the earth in a halo pattern due to a natural process (not random). On my actual take, I got lost in the sauce and ended up picking (A), which is a really great AC if your goal is to strengthen another premise. Turns out, this is not the best strategy to get this question right :/

(D) explains this natural phenomenon - apparently bumps on the earth affect the asteroids' trajectory, which not only gives us our "natural" theory plug but also disproves the idea that it's a random event.

I am amazed at how quickly I was able to get this in BR without noticing it was a 5-star. Here's how I solved it:

P1: DP is less tasty and healthful than fresh parsley

GAP: _______ should / should not be used in cooking

*I spotted the gap in the argument right away: What determines when DP (or anything for that matter) should or should not be used in cooking?

-----------------------------

C: DP > /used in cooking

Once you have this setup, you just need to plug in the AC that will guarantee the conclusion. We know that dried parsley isn't the tastiest or healthiest ingredient on earth because it's being compared to fresh parsley. This means we can safely conclude that it isn't the tastiest or healthiest ingredient out there. That's why (B) fits best - we're only trying to prove why DP shouldn't be used in cooking.

Idk how this isn't at least a 4-star. (B) came out of nowhere for me, and it relies on your ability to make some crazy subtle links here:

CTX: Rental duration = 2 days

CTX: Refunded rental if purchase game after rental period

P1: Rentals currently exceed expectations, and sales meet expectations

P2: The game takes several weeks to complete

*This would imply that people are exceeding the rental duration, which is only 2 days

*^this would also imply that people are turning around and purchasing the game after the rental period

------------------------------------------

C: Sales should exceed expectations too

As soon as I saw "lower social cost," my brain immediately jumped to the point in Passage A about the primary concern of enforcing every infraction within the exact confines of the law. The author in Passage A would likely agree that it's best to swing at 50% to get a point across (discretionary nonenforcement) rather than commit to a maximum solution (which would impose a heavy social cost).

@Nwim I'm in the same boat as you - though I didn't ever sense any hostility from the author's tone at any point during the passage, it seemed to be the only plausible answer. He's arguing that the idea the Invisible Hand theory is hindered by increased commercial output rather than enabled by it, so I'm not sure why he'd be receptive to the adoption of Pin Factory strategy.

Got it right, but holy cow why is this even a thing. Some of the stuff I've seen in the wild...but I guess if we take the passage and the passage alone, it wouldn't belong in:

A) a brochure (I think this one's a stretch, because see above...), because (I guess) they contain mostly touristy stuff BUT ALSO see above

B) a study, because typically, you'd hope to see a stance or hypothesis in the works

C) an editorial makes sense, similar to the reasoning on why a study doesn't fit (no stance taken)

D) Ye

Super upset with this one because I nailed the coffin shut on the trap answer (D) - I picked up on how we don't know for sure whether or not the period between 30 years old - late into life yielded introspective gains. Too bad I chose (C)

I started out with a pretty terrible method when first looking at this question. I was looking too far into the substance of the stimulus rather than the support structure.

My first clue was when I took to the ACs and noticed a common trend in the conclusions provided. Each conclusion was either firm or likely to occur. This triggered a lightbulb in my head, and a voice from heaven told me I could confidently yeet the ACs with shaky likelihood-based conclusions into the POE bin.

Next, I reassessed the support structure of the stimulus, and it seemed like the author was making a prediction based on probable trends. From there, I was able to narrow my choices down to (A), (B), and (D). Well (A) seemed a bit faulty and unreasonable to me, so onto (B). Spoiler - I chose (B) on my clean take, so there's that. Turns out (B) still relies on too much probability and is more of a guessing game.

Onto (D), which makes the most reasonable prediction out of all the ACs. (D) isn't exactly a bright neon sign in terms of "pick me" ACs, but it survives out of the bunch. Given the explanation provided by the 7Sage team, it beats (B) due to the stability of the pattern presented.