@shanedrider779 Hahahahaha! absolutely hilarious.

@edricbala130 (A) does not weaken the argument in the parallel, nor in the original. The argument states that the jellyfish uses confusion as a method of escape. It doesn't state that it confuses the sharks to think they are electric fish. I don't know that you can make that assumption validly from the statements alone. Further, (A) shows that the electric fish do not use that feature of abrupt flashes and colors. Why is that helpful? Because it shows that it is not a feature common to all jellyfish and that they do not need it. They have electricity as a defense mechanism. And since the non-electric fish do not have that mechanism, they evolved another mechanism to evade their predator. I hope this helps, and I hope I am not missing anything that renders my explanation inaccurate.

@atanasdimitrov322 you're correct. That is from PT 75.

@akikookmt881 I am with you. (B) does not help us based on the information in the stimulus. Maybe there is some other factor that affects the likelihood of cats dying. Answer choice (B) also requires the assumption that there's a link between cats being chased and dying. The stimulus indicates that they get stuck in trees, that doesn't mean they die as a result. I stick with my initial choice haha.

I think that the wording of answer choice (A) is not good enough. "Not as light-footed," which leaves the the possibility of humans having lighter feet haha.

The wording of (A) is not great, if I'm being honest.

(A) makes sense. Maybe they are not as light-footed because they do not get chased by dogs like the cats.

(B) Yes, but so what? Maybe cats most commonly die because of osteoporosis haha.

(C) So? did they develop this as a response to being chased? And we're discussing cats, so idc.

(D) I'm sure they are faster than elephants, but so what?

(E) Good for the dogs! haha

@pcainti665

It is natural to feel afraid. Our brains register the LSAT as a threat, and hence we become susceptible to fearful thoughts. It's easier said than done, but don't be afraid. What's that PT gonna throw at you that you haven't seen this far in your prep? A question? Maybe two? Well, those should not significantly affect your score. I am absolutely convinced that under-performance, if one is not overtly stressed, occurs because of attention deficit. Just make sure you're not burned out and you'll be fine.

@apawalter231 congratulations!! It should be an amazing feeling. What did you do different on LR and RC?

@gregoryalexanderdevine723 thank you, man!

And I actually didn't haha. My cognitive faculties were not at peak today. I think I'm getting a cold haha.

@lesliehughes92805 thanks!!! I am having troubling processing it haha.

I did Game 1, 2, and 4, respectively, before I did 3, which gave me 15 minutes to figure it out with little pressure.

@nathanieljschwartz435 I just took this test yesterday, so I think my reflection is kind of good on it still. I thought the LR sections were pretty standard. The RC had probably one tough passage (well at least I thought it was tough). I think it was the 3rd one, which discussed equipoise in medical research. LG was standard until the 4th game. That game needed some mental gymnastics haha.

And what a coincidence, I felt a little sluggish on this test as well, but I don't believe it was the test.

I was thinking that they may have done it for standardization purposes.

I just spoke to a person at LSAC, and she said, "the 180 is no longer allowed because of the start/stop function."

Do you guys have an idea as to why that's a bad thing?

@ianmatthewharris949 The key to scoring 174 and above is mastering the logic of the exam, and having an effective approach that you can execute fluidly on every section of the exam. The skills to solving the questions on the test must become second nature to you (i.e. you no longer have to pause and think about what you're ought to do, but your arsenal is ready upon command).

Thank you thank you guys!!!!!!

Can you elaborate on your mistakes? What do you consider a "stupid" mistake? And when you narrow your answer choices down to two, why do you think you're selecting the incorrect one?

The way I got to a consistent -0 is over time. I used to have to do a logic game almost everyday to stay consistent. However, now repetition is no longer important. With time and the right method, logic games become second nature. If you keep at it, you'll be able to finish almost every section, with a -0, and have about 10 minutes left to spare, or at least that's how it's become for me. Keep practicing and you'll get there.

If I was to encounter such a statement on a test, I would just keep them separate without the "or". That's just my personal preference though. So I'd just write the following:

P ----> /C

K ---> /C.

However, If P or K, then /C would also do the trick. So it's up to you to choose how to diagram them. Just make sure you do not put an "AND" in the sufficient condition.

@donamhyun690 Can you elaborate on your question because your original statement did not have an inclusive or. Neither P nor K are cute translates as the following in English: P is not cute And K is not cute. Maybe I'm missing something, so tell me more.

The entities should remain separate for the following reason: P+K ----> /C indicates that they are not cute when combined. But the original statement said that neither P nor K are cute, which means each entity on its own is not cute. In your example, the sentence became as the following: if P and K, then not cute. I hope this makes sense.

Same reasoning applies to your second scenario.

It depends on the context. Advanced causal statements can be probabilistic, partial, or multipilistic in nature.

@ayadmathews4

What was your diagnostic LSAT if you have already done one and don't mind sharing that with me?

@anonclsstudent104 you're right only if the language is definitive. This is beyond the point because I never denied the truth of the proposition when it is definitive.