Hi! I'd love to join! I'm scoring in the same range as you with a target of 170. Will be taking the LSAT for the first time in November, second in January. Would love an accountability partner to focus on being consistent with my study schedule, and talking through answer choices when doing review :)

hi! im interested!

hi! I'm interested as well :)

I got this one right initially but then wrong upon blind review. I initially chose C but switched to A but reversed my reasoning. Here's me trying to breakdown why C is correct:

"beauty is subjective" is the context that the author is challenging

"beauty is not subjective" (i.e. beauty is objective) is the author's argument

the question stem is asking me to WEAKEN the author's argument that beauty is not subjective (objective) and support that it IS subjective

- (A) supports the notion that beauty is objective, since the artists of the past and present independently conceptualized beauty in a similar way (no influence= independent thought, two parties independently saw beauty in the same way SO beauty is objective). This supports the author's argument

- (C) discusses the idea that the artists of the present were influenced by artists of the past (so beauty is not objective, since the perception of beauty was not independently conceived)

the leaders of all major parties have stated they oppose the new agriculture bill --> it will surely fail to pass

Condensed:

if leaders of all major parties oppose --> surely fail to pass

Remember this ladder:

all--> most--> some (at least one)

(A) correct answer

(B) "member" of a major party: incorrect

(C) "endorse" isn't the opposite of oppose

(D) opposite of what we need

(E) "support" isn't the opposite of oppose

When Blind Reviewing, I had to remind myself that in "LSAT land," the only way you can have an opposite of something is by negating that thing. Here, the opposite of "oppose" is to "not oppose," so we cannot guarantee that "support" or "endorse" are opposites, which immediately crosses off (C) and (E).

When I first went over this question, I failed to understand why B was correct, even after re-watching this video. Two days later, I'm back to reviewing and I think I finally understand why B is correct:

Just because only 5% (for example) of the service industry (which could in theory be a really large industry with lots of workers) move on to become members of boards of the 600 largest North American corporations, does not mean that those boards are only comprised of 5% of service industry workers (they could be comprised of 100%, 75%, or any percentage -- we really don't know). Thus, what we know about the percentage of service industry that goes into serving on these boards does not tell us anything about the composition of these boards themselves.

In the future, I think it could be helpful for me to focus on the two populations/categories that are being compared, maybe mentally drawing a pie chart for each to showcase how one does not necessarily determine the other.