This question doesn't click for me. The counselor says those who for the most part refrain from comparing themselves to others will most likely be self accepting and accepting of others. Say AC D and the stimulus were conversing with each other, and AC D says, "Well you're not considering that self disparagement and being dismissive can result from something other than comparing yourself to others". The counselor can easily respond and say, "Sure it can. Nonetheless, those who don't compare themselves to others will still most likely be, on the whole, self accepting and accepting of others". The word most likely leaves other possibilities open.

#help

What threw me off with Q19 is what was said before it talks about chess. It mentions the advantage athletes have in their respective fields but not in general lab tests. For the chess game, it says "similarly" chess players...This leads one to believe that it's talking about something other than chess.

What threw me off with 27 was the "certain types of cases" which makes it seem like it's not a standard pricing pattern if it only applies to certain types of cases.

Question 14 is bullshit.

E still makes no sense to me simply because of the assumption that we have to make. There could've been another problem with the computer that could have necessitated designing it with the QWERTY configuration. We simply don't know.

I am in the same situation and started to make a few improvements by reviewing some of the analytics to see what question and stimulus types trip me up the most. Also see how many you are missing on the first ten because they tend to be a little easier and sometimes going through those a little quicker to save time for the hardest questions at the end can help get a better score. Don't feel discouraged the LSAT is complicated. With a bit more practice and an effective strategy you will improve.

I don't understand how A can possibly be wrong. It says one is better than the other, thus by planting the former there would be a negative effect on the environment. If this is the case then there must be some negative component with planting trees. Just because one thing is better than the other doesn't mean the original will negatively impact global warming, it just means it won't positively impact global warming as much as the latter.

The "takes for granted" on this question completely threw me off.

RC is too subjective.

I was leaning towards D but chose E because I thought that the argument was using the identical twins as an example of why OUR inclinations must be genetic in origin. In which I'd turn around and say, well you grabbed one subset of the human species and tried to tie that to the whole of the human species. It may be true that identical twins in the study have a genetic component causing them to have similar characteristics and behaviors, but to make the claim that many of our inclinations must be genetic based off of a study of identical twins would be absurd. I guess I just misinterpreted the stimulus.