Hi everyone,
I'm wondering if there is a cheat sheat that details all of the different question stems in LR and how to approach them (i.e., weakening questions = attack the support, necessary assumption = take the contrapositive of the ACs and see which one wrecks the argument, etc. etc.). Please let me know if something like this exists. I haven't touched anything LSAT-related since the June exam and I'm looking to jump back in. Thanks!
on the timed run, this seems like the hardest question lol
Is it just me or does it sometimes take more effort to read and understand some users' lawgic-heavy comments than to simply read / answer / review the question yourself? Not sure if I should be concerned lol
Thanks everybody for your input! Seems like it’s worth taking it the fourth time to maximize my chances
How is it not C???
#help (Added by Admin)
My Aug’21 results came back (3rd test this calendar year) and I was blown away by how badly I fucked up. I mean I was averaging 169+ and repeatedly hitting 170-171 the last five or so tests before the actual exam and my score came out to be 162, which is one point higher than my first test. My highest score is 165 which was on the June exam, and I’m signed up to take it a fourth time in October. I’m just unsure if it’s worth it at this point. Based on my PTs, I’m definitely capable of hitting my goal of high 160s but it hasn’t happened during the past two tests (which I was actually confident about) and I initially wanted to apply by the end of September or early October so taking it in October will push back my applications to at least mid November. So I’m wondering if it’s worth taking it a fourth time and if I do and don’t perform better than my high of 165, will it negatively impact me my candidacy in any way? Just for a complete picture, my LSAC gpa is 4.02 from Berkeley Haas and my goal has been to get into a top 10 school, specifically in the East Coast. Please let me know if you have any advice!
I picked A but then realized it's just describing a David Lynch movie, not a musical from the 30's haha
I am not convinced that E is an incorrect AC. I think it concedes to B since B does a better job of justifying the argument, but I don't really agree with JY's reasoning for eliminating it. "Some circumstances," stated in AC E is just as vague as "other interests," stated in AC B. Additionally, given the context of the stimulus, I would think if you tolerate a regulation, you implicitly support it. Does anyone agree / disagree? Would love to hear why if you disagree.
#help (Added by Admin)
When you negate AC A, does it turn into "some crows were among..." or "all the crows were among"?
Additionally, if you remove "always" from AC B, would the answer work?
#help