I can't figure out why the answer is C! No matter how much I look at it, I gravitate towards D.
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
The argument concludes that magnets are effective at helping with back pain, based on the premise which describes the experiment. This is a weakening question so our job is to attack the relationship between the argument (the conclusion) and the premises that got us there. The different causes of back pain have no impact on this relationship - if anything, it's just additional context. It does not help the argument or weaken the argument in anyway, because it does nothing to the relationship between the premise (the experiment) and the conclusion (magnets help with back pain).
I hope that helps a bit!
I'm confused - how do we know if the "most" relationship applies to both the ideas in the sentence, or just the first one?
#help #feedback - what question is this (what practice test/section/question number)? I'd like to come back to it. thanks!
Question 3 has both "unless" and "no" in the second premise - which group would we follow? are we supposed to do both? if so, how?
For Question 2, why do we start with the premise S → /A instead of the first premise? #help
#feedback is it possible to have a print option for this exercise?
#help
The suggestion to broaden our knowledge base confused me, because aren't we supposed to not bring in any outside knowledge when we are doing questions on the LSAT?
The last lesson ("That as object clause") explains this well. Basically, in this case "that" functions both as the object, and as the linking word for the clause that follows.
I don't understand why "vegans can obtain amino acids" is the kernel of 15.1, but "the puppies were rescued" is not the kernel of 14.2? #help
What exactly is a mediating cause? How would we define it?