I got this one correct but jeez....I am not so sure that was a two or there's just so many literary terms crammed in there that it becomes a word salad.

I have given on identifying the flaw in these questions and have just gone to straight up A then B mapping approaches. I don't know if anyone else is doing this but it is the only way for me on these questions.

This such bush league BS question because you have to make a an assumption that isn't immediately there, even as far as LSAT questions go

This question is particularly frustrating due to the fact it wants you to rely on outside knowledge according to JY's explanation, which as we all know is how you can very quickly get yourself into trouble on LR questions. Also there are whole sections talking about flawed experiments and sample size being a major flaw and here we are presented with small and specific example.

I think the final paragraph sums up the down and dirty of it all better than all the previous statements on these questions before. It helped me understand these questions in a much better way. Highly recommend

I had to spend around 4 minutes to get the question correct and have essentially been getting all of these incorrect. On this one I decided to just spend the time to map it so I could develop a process. I mapped the entire thing out in Lawgic and then thought through all of it like a normal person and reached the correct answer.

It helps once you recognize the conclusion to try some contrapositives I have noticed.

Am I the only one who feels spending significant time on a question such as this one is not necessarily worth the time considering it's basically a wording trick?

@JohnB I too thought this same way as it never states the judge gave the instructions, it merely states instructions were given and given in two different manners.

Thank you so much! I am working full time and last time I took the LSAT was about 8 years ago now and I completely winged it and got around a 149, and after a lot of life I decided to sit down and actually study for around 4 months to see what I can do!

@AliLazim agreed, I think it's just getting down the formula for most and pattern recognition

The Disney argument essentially funnels you into a one of two choices that must be made and leaves very little room for interpretation or doubt. It is a one or the other argument.

The Tiger argument is right down the middle because tigers can cause injury thus proving in certain situations that not every mammal is suitable to keep as a pet but is one specific instance in a case with many others.

The Trash bin argument leaves much open to interpretation and therefore has the least amount of support as it is all circumstantial really.