This is a principle question, not a Pseudo-Sufficient Assumption. I think you mislabeled it.

She is denying the conclusion though, wtf this question makes no sense!

The third possibility does not have to be located in the stimulus for it to be a false dichotomy. The two options you just described based on consistently is exactly the polarity of the two options presented in the stimulus/argument. Either all the other employees also get fired, or Vernon gets his job back. The argument concludes with the latter, when there are other potential options.

For anybody who knows their list of common cookie-cutter flaws, this question should take 30 seconds.

The reason B is wrong is simply because you have no idea whether the current administration is also economically successful. You can't make assumption. So C is correct. It's more provable.

This is actually a really easy question. Classic cookie-cutter False Dichotomy flaw question. It fundamentally assumes that being unprofessional can be treated as either being fired or remaining in the job. Vernon was justly fired but others who were unprofessional were not, so this must mean that he should get his job back. This is what the argument is saying. It doesn't take into account that a third possibility could exist for Vernon or the others. So you get answer choice E as being correct.

Basic False Dichotomy flaw, I have no idea why so many people got it wrong.

I got this question right after being stuck between C and D. The reason I chose C instead of D is because, in the case of D, a "compelling reason" and "insubstantial reasons" are two separate things. In D, it immediately assumes that having a "compelling reason" is enough to be guilty of abuse of power, but it doesn't consider that one could have a substantial reason to withhold information even though it's not compelling. A substantial reason is SEPARATE from a compelling reason. So by eliminating this, C becomes the right answer.

What do you guys think? Does my reasoning make sense?

You have to make a MAJOR assumption to think that the steam carried the chemicals into the atmosphere. Nowhere in the passage does it remotely indicate that the steam carried them.

I really hate this question, it is extremely unfair.

I think C is wrong because it directly attacks a premise. It rejects the premise that the participants reported exercising 1 hour longer each day on average. That's why it's wrong.

Does anyone agree? What do you think about this explanation?

Where does the author talk about the influence on later artists? Makes no sense.

#help (Added by Admin)

For the first question, where does it say she wants to reform the view? It doesn't say so anywhere explicitly, and barely implies it. That's why I didn't choose C.

#help (Added by Admin)

I thought this was a strengthening question, I did it as a strengthening question and I got it right.

"Indian" is not an ethnicity. Are the LSAT writers that uneducated?

Agreed

Why is this considered a level 4 difficulty question when 91% of people got it right...

I don't understand this question at all whatsoever. Can someone help me? No matter how many times I watch the video I don't get why the answer is B.

#help (Added by Admin)

The contrapositive of answer choice D is that the pollution of nutrient-rich sewage makes algae proliferate. This is completely in line with the argument. So why is D not correct?

#help (Added by Admin)

I scrolled down and was about to comment this exact same thing. D actually works out as an answer if you take the contrapositive.

I got this question right in 30 seconds :) What's the name of this flaw though?

Why is the B the right answer? It doesn't have to be ONLY through neurochemical changes that a person's behavior improves. It's just one of the things that happen, there could be others. If you negate B, it's still consistent with the argument. This makes no sense!

#help (Added by Admin)

Not to brag, but this was one of the easiest NA questions I've done lol. I got this right in 1:00. Why is this tagged as level 5?

But the argument is not "failing to consider" that one phenomenon can continue even when being impeded upon by another. IT IS considering that. Last line says that despite ghost stories, people still gained scientific understanding. The point of the argument is to say paranormal TV programs will still allow for science to continue growing.

So why A is the correct answer is beyond me. I don't get it.

JY's explanation for why B is the correct answer choice makes absolutely zero sense. Still have no idea why B is correct.

#help (Added by Admin)

@taschasp823 said:

Yes! You are given scrap paper that you can use for the entire test.

HOLY SHIT. That's a game changer for me. I'll literally be getting the vast majority of SA and MBT questions right now.

@taschasp823 said:

@emilev2511 said:

Problem is on the actual LSAT I can't write down anything.

What do you mean? Why not? Writing a few things down on a difficult SA or MBT question isn't a bad idea.

Wait, you're allowed to have paper for the LR section of the LSAT? You're allowed to write things down?

@taschasp823 said:

Have you tried diagramming the questions out? Are you able to get them right if you diagram them?

Most of the time when I do it untimed and I actually draw them out on paper, most of time I do get the answer right. Not all the time though. But doing that certainly helps.

Problem is on the actual LSAT I can't write down anything.