- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Discussions
Q19, Just because the spread of technology is beneficial to many other people we can conclude that the author believes that "OFTEN" the desire of making profits will be beneficial to many other people?
I would even buy it if it says, "it was produced in the same geographical radius". But it didn't say it, it says "both produced in a small geographical radius". If it is not the same, how does it strengthen it? #help (Added by Admin)
I feel like A makes A LOT more assumptions.
It talks about start-up cost for ostrich farming, is more than cattle, but how do we know that the start-up cost would only include two costs: land and the price for ostrich? What if it includes acquiring a license? What if it includes extra money for the forage?
Can someone please explain to me what Cultural Trend have to do with fashion?
#help (Added by Admin)
I think JY did not explain D) and E) well in this video.
D) is wrong because "ba level lower than current limit" is a very broad range. Someone who didn't drink at all would also be a person whose "ba level is lower than average."And it would not be reasonable to assume they disagree that these people pose no threat.
E) is wrong because Miguel says that reducing the limit would have "LITTLE EFFECT" on the current situation. It does not mean it would have no effect on the current situation, but some, very little effect. So they actually both agree on E) that the light drinkers pose some threat.
I thought A strengthens the argument by blocking a potential criticism against Caligula that "his censorship is the reason why very few documents survived". I know I have made an assumption here, but to me C) also made an assumption that Caligula's behaviour cannot possibly be an act of imitating or confidentially similar to the earlier tyrants. I don't see why C) is stronger than A).
In the same way as E) can't we argue that B) a high degree of creativity and a high level of artistic style seldomly combined together in the creation of art also doesn't have to be true because the creation of art itself could be very rare?
How could we make this assumption that the audience of politicians and scholars is not the same group of people? Based on what information could we make this assumption?
#help (added by Admin)
#help
Isn't a) making a typical logic mistake "the more the better"? We do not know if F-light is "dry" in general, all we know is that it is drier in comparison to T-light. We do not know where the line is drawn for the displayed objects to begin to deteriorate and if being slightly dryer would necessarily be better.
I am just curious, what is the average score of the "top scorer" you mentioned? I want to know where I am at if I can solve this question within the target time.
#help Q19 Answer choice D.
How do we know if "some kinds of arrangement of chess pieces" are not the ones that have the "configurations that are typical of chess games?"
Question 8, says that Porter wrote additional chapters correcting his findings in general, but how do we know that he revised and improved this particular book that was published in 1943??
#help (added by admin)
why doesn't B explain anything? If the salary of the scientists that are necessary to hire to preserve the wetland increased by 100 times, then, of course, the funding won't be sufficient even if it increased by tenfold.
#help (Added by Admin)
His friends probably don't see John in the mirror as much ...
How can we make that assumption? This is THE WORST LSAT question I have ever seen...
Answer choice E says Cho.... emerged as the result of two organisms having undergone
endosymbiosis, how do we know if Cho.... EMERGED because of it or maybe it is always there and just endosymbiosis just took place and has nothing to do with Cho.... emerging?
#help (Added by Admin)
What if Amy is someone who lives in a nearby town and comes to Springfield to work during the day? She still cannot keep the pig as a pet and doesn't have to be a resident of Springfield. Answer choice A doesn't make sense.
I first choose E and during BR changed to A because this statement "justification must be distinguished from explanation" I got Justification → explanation and chose A
I crossed out D right the way because I didn't know the classic account is the same as classical theory. LOL
I see how to answer B is the "best" choice out of all, but let's say the material to make thin boards are little bit cheaper than making thick boards, it is still cheaper, it doesn't effectively strengthen the argument that makes the connection between Thin boards and wealth. At most, you can come to a conclusion that people who used thin boards to build their houses are not a lot POORER than the people that used thick boards to build their houses.
I still think no answer choice is right, but as compared to others, B is the most relevant to the subject.
We cannot assume that just because it survived it is made of better, or rather more expensive materials. For instance, if you make a house out of really expensive wood, it will be rotten and eventually disappear after a few decades. But if you make a house out of stone, it would be there for a much longer period of time. So we can't make that assumption.
I didn't even read the conclusion: What was said on the advertisement had an effect, instead, I just assumed that it was the increase in the price of cigarettes that caused a decline in number of smokers.
This is by far the most unconvincing question on LSAT that I have ever encountered. 1) How can we make the assumption that just because the drug can prevent obesity in RODENTS so it could prevent obesity IN GENERAL? 2) How do we know what the drug did the prevent obesity? Whether it through angiogenesis or acts as a laxative? Huge huge unsupported assumptions 3) All of this is even assuming we made the somewhat more reasonable assumption that people/rodents are obese because they "have too many fat tissues" Is that really obvious? I don't know.