I was wondering how I should attack/understand this question?

It asks if it discusses the relationship between the reliability and one of the AC's. What does relationship mean in this case? Is the question asking if the passage mentions some sort of a connection between the reliability and one of the answer choices?

Thank you.

For this question, I was wondering why E is the wrong answer? Passage A and B endorse the same principles that lying is necessary in writing good narrative, but B says later they see it as unethical while A does not. Is it because the principle they are endorsing isn't exactly the same but applied to diff contexts (lying is necessary in historical vs. lying is necessary in autobiographical) and thus D is the right answer?

Hi, I'm restarting studying for the LSAT again, and I had this list of pinned questions for logical reasoning.

I was wondering how I can unpin all of those questions so I can sort of start fresh? Is there a way to unpin all by deleting history or do I have to go through all of them manually?

Thank you.

Hi, I had a quick question about denying the link between premise and conclusion.

In this video: https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/egyptian-and-mayan-pyramids-flaw-question/

JY talks about how denying the argument by denying the link between the premise and conclusion is not the same as denying the conclusion. In the particular question, the author denies the link between premise and conclusion but is not allowed to deny the conclusion.

When are you ever allowed to deny the conclusion? Or are you not allowed to usually?

Thanks.

Prep Test 17 Section 4 Passage 3 #16

Could someone help me with why D is not the correct answer?

In the second paragraph, it gives the stats for carbon taxes and says "It should be noted, however, that these numbers ignore the effect of the tax on economic growth, and hence on emissions". Doesn't that imply that the taxes need to account for the effect on economic growth, and are thus influenced by it and would vary based on the effect that the tax would have on a country's economy (D)?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

I had a quick question regarding answer choice C: Most agree that introduced species can cause extinctions.

The passage says that ecologists realize that when humans introduce new species into existing ecosystems, even pristine, species-rich habitats are threatened. So I thought that because it says "ecologists think", we could say that "most ecologists agree that."

However, is the reason this is wrong because when the LSAT says "ecologists think", we don't know exactly how many ecologists that think that? E.g. it could be 2 ecologists think, but it would be not provable to say that it's "most ecologists think".

Just curious to see if this is an actually right interpretation of the difference between these concepts. Thanks.

Could anyone provide an example of a stimulus or anything that fits into the answer C? It doesn't actually have to be matching the content in C, just the form of "confusing x with y".

Thank you very much.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

I was a little confused on why C is the right answer.

The stimulus says:

If an external force intervenes to give members of a community political self-determination, then that political community will almost surely fail to be truly free, since it is during the people's struggle to become free by their own efforts that the political virtues necessary for maintaining freedom have the best chance of arising.

The correct AC for PSAr is:

A community cannot remain free without first having developed certain political virtues.

But doesn't this just restate the premise? The premise already says "the political virtues necessary for maintaining freedom", and the AC is free -> political virtues. So I was wondering how this principle helped.

Thanks.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Hey ya'll, I'm a 170 scorer and I'm planning on taking the August (or September) LSAT, I was wondering if there'd be any high scorers out there like 176s that'd be willing to study with me and discuss logical reasoning questions?

They do say that it's also helpful for people who know their stuff to continuously articulate their thinking to others in order to solidify that knowledge :D and I can be a good listener. I found that I learn a lot more when I talk to people about my thinking and hear their input, so it'd be great if I could establish this with someone.

Thanks!

Hello,

I was wondering what the 8 digit HTML keycode is on the ProctorU system checkup? Is that the same thing as the LSAC account number?

Thank you very much.

Is the main conclusion for main conclusion questions always explicitly stated in the stimulus? I was wondering if there was ever a case where the main conclusion turned out not to be in the stimulus but an answer choice that happened to be supported by all the premises in the stimulus. Or would this be a MSS thing instead?

Thanks.

Hi,

This is a question about an answer choice like that of PT62 S2 Q20.

It's: The younger a universe is, the brighter the stars are.

Do these relationships work similarly like conditionals, in that only after concluding that the universe is younger, we can say the brighter its stars are?

i.e. you can't see a situation that the stars are brighter, therefore conclude that the universe is younger with this type of relationship?

Thank you.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Hi,

I tried creating a LR drill based on 25 questions and these categories: Agree, Weak, NA, Para, AP, Inf, RRE, Streng, Disagr, Flaw, PSAr using PT B - 75 on Hard Difficulty, yet I get the error message "Sorry, we were not able to create a drill based on your criteria. Please try again."

I'm on Windows 11 and Google Chrome. Could anyone help me out? Thanks.

Hey guys, I'm looking for a study group for the August LSAT (No LG)

I took the September test last year and scored a 167, and I'm looking for any way to boost my score.

Honestly, I haven't studied with groups yet, and I thought I'd just test it out! Maybe talking about the LR or RC questions and stuff will help me see some different perspectives.

If you're in a same position as me, let me know and shoot me a DM; I can make a discord where we meet once a week or something just to keep each other accountable in studying and stuff.

(And if there's any high scorers out there already, feel free to come by and help us out too :D)

Thanks! Much appreciated.

Hi,

Is there a way to make drills based off of questions you got wrong in previous drills? I only saw the option to compile questions you got wrong during previous practice tests, not drills themselves.

Thanks.

I was wondering why you can't use C as a contrapositive?

I interpreted C as Universal feature + not invention -> innate ability

/innate ability -> /universal feature or /not invention

It says money is an artificial invention unlike language, which is an innate ability

And it says money is universal

So couldn't money -> /innate ability -> /universal feature or /not invention, and since it is a universal feature, can conclude /not invention? Or is the mistake that I am interpreting /not invention to mean invention, when it simply means it's not not an invention?

Thanks.

Could someone explain why A is the answer? In the passage, the idea of "indifference toward offspring as a defense mechanism against establishing close ties with infants unlikely to survive" was mentioned in the first paragraph and not in relation to Shahar's actual work.

Shahar does explain that parents did feel affection for their children though, but he doesn't mention anything about the fact that many infants were unlikely to survive. That's why I said A was not answered.

However, is it enough that Shahar's work says parents felt affection for their children to say that he answered the question posed by A? I wasn't sure how important the "spite of the fact that many infants were unlikely to survive" part was.

Thanks.

I was a little confused on why C is incorrect. The computer scientists simply say that they think they can make AI by encapsulating the information contained in the human genome. Then the Biologist talks about the operations of the human brain.

I interpreted this as sort of an analogy or something, as it doesn't say that the computer scientists are explicitly trying to model the AI after the human brain. Then, I said the NA should be that the computer scientists ARE trying to model the AI after the human brain (because if they weren't, the author's mentioning of human brain wouldn't apply).

I get why B is correct in that given the argument without looking too much in the context, it must be the case that the interactions and the protein structures are not both getting info from the human genome, but was still confused why the assumption I initially pointed out doesn't work.

Additionally, for these questions, would it be a better strategy instead to kind of ignore the context (some computer scientists believe...) and focus on the bulk of the author's argument?

Thanks!