Any recommendations on how to get parallel flaw/parallel reasoning questions without taking up a ton of time? I know that that question is often answered with "it takes practice" but in the case of needing to map out each answer choice, any suggestions? Just get faster at mapping?

loud booing for Passage B

YOU"RE NOT EVEN USING THE TERM HOW CAN THE MEANINGS OF THE TERM BE CONFUSED I HATE IT HERE

I read the distinction as being between endangering and "most dangerous." I get how A is wrong now, in that they are really only disagreeing about physical harm, not harm at large. But I still struggle with C as the correct answer. Like yeah, he has only shown that to be possible, but by raising the possibility he is challenging Yolanda's assumption that only intellectual damage could result from computer crimes. He doesn't need to prove it actually happened for the possibility of it to challenge her assumption. Where am I going wrong??? #help

#help I really am struggling here to find an approach/method to NA questions. The explanation videos only help me to understand why answers are wrong versus right, but they're not at all helping me establish a good approach to getting them right on my own. Does anyone know of any other resources that can help explain NA questions because clearly the explanation videos are not helping it click for me --I've gotten all but two questions wrong in this section despite feeling good about the curriculum at large up until now.

been feeling good this whole time and now NA is so royally kicking my ass

#help I'm still confused (based on JY's explanation) how E is completely incorrect, or at least I'm needing a different way to understand how it's wrong (besides its strong language). If the stimulus is saying that the animals deemed worthy and able to be domesticated were done so in the past, therefore today the undomesticated animals are either difficult to domesticate or unworthy, how then does difficulty not have a bearing on whether or not the animal was domesticated? If the remaining animals are either difficult or unworthy, it follows (at least in my brain) that difficulty = barrier to domestication and so in turn, "easier" is a quality of animals who have already been domesticated. I don't know if that makes any sense but his explanation didn't really help me understand this.

Everything I've learned thus far in my LSAT journey has trained me to think I CANNOT make the jump from "use of resources" to "well-being." UGH

Someone help? Grammatically speaking, for #5, wouldn't the contrapositive translated back into English still read as "or?" I'm confused because that doesn't follow the De Morgan's Laws.

Written out:

21 or 21+ -> A

If you are 21 or older, you are legally able to purchase alcohol.

/A -> /21 and /21+ reads as...

If you are not able to legally purchase alcohol, you are neither 21 "and" older than 21? Wouldn't that grammatically correct sentence be "...you are neither 21 or older than 21?

#feedback "Terrible answer choice" without any explanation of why it's incorrect is incredibly discouraging for those students like myself who chose the answer, and doesn't provide us with any help to avoid making a similar mistake in the future. Besides making you feel really bad about yourself, it's also just not productive or constructive.

Genuinely thought I was having a stroke first time reading this stimulus

I got this one but anyone else consistently finding 3/5 difficulty questions to be sometimes most difficult? I think I overthink them the most since they sit somewhere right in the middle of perceived difficulty. In my practice tests my wrong answers are 3/5s & 5/5s. yiiiiiikies