I had a stroke trying to understand what JY was saying.

I feel like E makes us make a massive assumption that the "5 year long program" was the causal factor of skillful increase. Also, D is a massive assumption that more facilities means better/ quicker treatment. What if most of these people died on impact because they were going so fast? Wouldn't that make this irrelevant to the stimulus?

34% of ppl got this right, horrid question from the LSAT.

Pretty poor explanation here tbh, not sure what he was even saying.

Took me three minutes to even understand the stim, but once I understood it I got it in 5 seconds after.

This passage is evil, average star is like a four star. Not even sure how this is allowed.

I am getting these right, but it is just so hard to do these quickly. These might be a skip and do them at the end of the test.

Went from getting a 2/5 before these lessons to a 5/5- great set of lessons JY!

Could see how this would be a tuff question with no practice. Great lesson, JY!

For these types of questions I have made scenarios up to help me. EX: Let's say the people in this district believe high taxes are at 40%, but corporate taxes are currently 25% and the legislator wants to take it down to 18%. Would they want him to do this? We have no idea. Maybe they think anything below 40% is acceptable. These types of questions I find it best to not get caught up in abstract language, rather just come up with real life scenarios and apply yourself to those results.

Got this question in just over a minute and could've gotten it sooner if I didn't map it out (I always do it as practice). If you're struggling to comprehend this one the parallel that JY uses is perfect. Great lesson!

Not sure how B is not the correct answer. Couldn't other factors contribute to "avoiding heart disease" other than avoiding dairy? These could include not smoking, a low stress job, staying active, etc. I try to apply the lessons of the past and then all of a sudden there is a new rule each video. Not sure these videos are helping.

Can someone explain this better? Does he not challenge the point that music is not individual and go off traditions in his entire response?

Not quite sure what A is even saying tbh

4/5, I will take it. Doubt there are a lot of these on the LSAT, so as long as you have a general idea of what is going on I cannot imagine it will be much harder.

Negation really worked for me here. Formed it in my head "Qualified teachers COULD be persuaded to move into the region..." then this wrecks the whole argument. Negation is huge in NA questions.

I eliminated A because in the argument it states "... it readily permits a repeated use of exactly the same color" (talking about colored paper). This premise alone goes to show that the comparison of "differences in color" is utterly irrelevant.

Feel like this is one that you get by POE, not any good answers but D is by far the most relevant answer out of the five.

Anyone else second guess themselves for a minute because this one felt too easy?

C just makes no sense

This is a horrible question tbh

I was between A and C, but choose C precisely for the reason of "actual" trials being mentioned since nothing was tested for actual trials it was all based on psychological trials. E was the first choice I even eliminated because of the last part of the sentence. The point was not to find general limitations on the strategy- it was to provide support that the strategy was effective.

Anyone else cramming for their Wednesday test hahahaah! Taking it again in September, so I will be sure to get these lessons done before then.

Had it right at first then changed to D at BR, I understand how A is right but also do not understand how D is wrong.

Bad question, Toronto and NY are both EST. No way they could have different horoscopes this makes no sense.