I kept answer choice A because I thought that its negated version seemed to attack the conclusion. Negated: "Some birds of pray other than the dwarf masked owl nest in the spiny cactus." If there are other birds that nest on the same nesting grounds, couldn't it be that they take over the nesting grounds and now there aren't enough for the dwarf masked owls(dmo)? Which means the dmos don't have anywhere to go? #help

I'm having trouble understanding answer choice D. I'm really bad with math, so that might be the reason I can't wrap my head around how this is the correct answer. I eliminated answer choice D because of the wording "does not increase the amount customers spend to an amount grater than they would spend..." My understanding of this phrasing was that if the manufactures' suggested retail price for a designer bag is $1,000, then the credit card bonus program cannot total to $1000.01 (or higher) once shipping is accounted for. However, to me this still leaves open the possibility that this designer bag can end up costing exactly $1,000 through the credit card program. If this is the case, the credit card holder isn't spending less than they would spend if they purchased the same merchandise in a retail store. This answer choice seemed to weaken the argument and therefore I quickly eliminated it. Clearly, I misunderstood something along the way. Any help trying to figure out where I went wrong is much appreciated:) #help

Thank you!! @ebelineluna589 @rahulsatija300827

I found this stimulus to be a little frustrating in the sense that it didn't explicitly give us a conclusion and it had make the assumption that Reade's current popularity is because of her stance on complex voting issues which the public is able to evaluate. I am at the point in my studies when I am scared to make any assumptions. I get that it's not a far fetched assumption to think that Reade is giving us her stance when discussion complex issues, but I was terrified of making that jump. What if Reade wants to discuss a complex issue without giving her opinion?? #help

If we are drawing a bridge isn't that Sufficient Assumption. I have always thought of SA as drawing a bridge, where is my thought process going wrong? #help

I was oblivious to the fact that the conclusion makes reference to the idea that experimentation "on those animals who humans emphasize with" needs to end. The premise they gave us is that all animals are able to feel pain. Wouldn't the missing link have to connect the idea of emphasizing with pain? #help

Required= implies a necessary condition

At 1:32, J.Y. talks about the difference between not (hp achieved -----> high tech) v.

hp achieved --->/high tech. When doing this on my own, I struggled to map out the conclusion because it didn't have any of the conditional logic indicators. The only word that stood out was "depends." The not in front of the parenthesis implies a negation to a statement and the other implies a conditional relationship, right? How do I know when I am looking at a negation v. conditional relationship. Where can I find those lessons? #help

Yes, this helps a lot! Thank you!

This made no sense during time, but totally clicked under blind review. Petition to make the LSAT untimed.

In regard to left and right, there are two things going on:

1. Do the people purchasing the car drive on the left or right side?

2. Where is the manufacturer placing the steering wheel, on the left or the right side?

Based on the passage, we are explicitly told that in Japan cars are driven on the left side. Meanwhile, in North America cars are driven on the right side.

The conclusion brings in the idea regarding the location of the steering wheel by stating that in order to get closer towards eliminating the trade imbalance, North American manufactures need to produce more cars with right-sided steering wheels.

The assumption being made is that in Japan, there is a high demand for right-sided steering wheels and that because North American manufactures are producing left-side steering wheels, they're putting themselves at a disadvantage in regards to getting rid of the trade imbalance. Am I understanding this correctly?? #help

Im still struggling to understand how answer choice D triggers the conditional relationship from our stimulus. Stimulus:

/benefit recipient →

/worth more than what is expected or customary → /generous

Is it that the negation of /worth more than what is expected or customary also includes that it's worth equal to what one would expect???

#help

Same!

Question 8 was brutal. I'm still struggling to understand what part of the passage I should have focused on in order to get to the correct answer choice. Someone in the comments below mentioned that in Line 37, the author mentions "work of hitherto unknown illustrators, journalists, and novelists....." I had interpreted this line to mean that we didn't know the names of the people who had produced these journals, novels and illustrations, but I didn't think that this meant that the works were unknown by scholars. I would greatly appreciate any #help

J.Y. talks about possibly having to read this article twice, in order to understand what's going on, I am really struggling with the idea of doing so under time. I feel like the biggest challenge with RC is the time constraint rather than the actual material :(

For question 6, was anyone else tempted by answer choice E? To me, AC E and D were both saying similar things. Would really appreciate someone's #help

I think I understand what J.Y. means by saying that D is correct because it focuses on the principle of covering a subject matter in depth. However, the stimulus also indicates that the thing that needs to be covered in depth is the "basic subject matter." I ended up eliminating answer choice D because I didnt think that it addressed that part of the stimulus. How do we know that those two greek tragedies that you're reading are part of the "basic subject matter"? I would really appreciate some clarification #help

Could someone give an example of the meteorologist engaging in the statistic provided by the statistician? Thanks in advance! #help

I'm still a bit unclear on why C is incorrect. AC C says that the meteorologist "reanalyzed a correlation ." I thought that was true. The stimulus says the meteorologist said,"no significant aspect can be controlled by...." Isn't that reanalyzing the original train of thought stated by the statistician??? #help

I keep confusing the meaning of this answer choice with that of E:(

Any #help is much appreciated.

Can someone please explain what answer choice A is saying? #help

So for main point questions, the conclusion is already in the stimulus? for some reason I thought MP stimuli didn't include the conclusion and we had to find it in the answer choice:( #help