- Joined
- Jan 2026
- Subscription
- Live
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
@ulysses I believe you're confusing what sentence in the stimulus is the conclusion. The author's concludes that the despite the fact most people are not misled by words, we shouldn't be drawn to believe most people are not going to be misled by using maps.
We are asked to look at the phrase "most people are taught to be cautious interpreters..., BUT." This phrase talks about a contrast between language and maps. The key word in answer choice C is "distinction." It supports the fact that people are often educated in interpreting language, which is how they are generally not misled by words. However since people are not educated in maps, they could be misled.
Hope this helped!
Sometimes you have to trust your gut. I originally chose E but I completely overlooked the "counteract" part of that answer choice. B makes the most sense since the author talks about how there isn't a study yet that directly links with ginseng reducing stress. Just because there isn't a study proving it, doesn't necessarily mean it's false.
D is basically saying that sponsors are concerned about how viewers of a television show purchase things. How they contribute to consumerism. Sponsors want their advertisements to be displayed during commercial breaks so people can buy their products. In return, the sponsors are practically paying the television shows for promoting their products.
I got this one wrong because I misread the "purchasing power" part and went to fast. I had originally chosen C because I had made an assumption while reading the stimulus.
@BenPocheron I'm not sure if this is right but I looked at the word "some" in the question. Perhaps some jurors have solidified their views by 30%, but in some instances, others might have firmly reached their views by 80% or 90%.
@Cpierce In this situation, the author was very explicit with his language. The key word for me was "obviously," which is strong language to use when stating your conclusion. That's what helped me narrow it down to answer choices B and D.
From there, I had to connect the conclusion with the premise, leading me to D.
A: Based on the information in the stimulus, we cannot determine whether all coins with the explorer's head has a building on the other side.
B: This is reversing the sufficient and necessary condition. The stimulus gives us the condition that judge's head -> tree.
C: We don't have enough information.
D: The condition in the stimulus tells us judge's head -> tree. Therefore, it must be true that all those with a building on one side, will not have a judge's head on the other.
E: We don't have enough information.
I thought about an analogy to help me interpret the last sentence of the stimulus. The author tells us how someone that lacks the desire to drink alcohol should not be praised. She then goes on to tell us an exception to this rule. If you discipline yourself to avoid alcohol or drink then you should be praised.
Think of it like this, a person that suffered from alcoholism is now sober 20+ years. This is something that we should praise that person for because they learned how to discipline themselves.
That's how I got to C. A person should be praised for avoiding alcohol only if they overcame the desire for alcohol.
B and E are easy to rule out because the author did not mention anything about blame. D made no mention of praise so that's out. A talked about consequences but where does the author mention anything about that?
@LowriThomas When do we know when to not take things as literal? I feel like in some questions, we need to answer solely based on the information provided on the stimulus but then in other instances, we need to assume a few things.
Hi! What are some good recorded live sessions regarding conditional reasoning? This has been my weak spot so far when it comes to the LSAT, and going back to the foundational part of the curriculum hasn't really helped. Would appreciate some help!
I'm getting more confident in answering MSS questions so I'll put my explanation for how I got to C if it can help anyone out.
A. I eliminated A because the stimulus only talks about the volume of a goose. We compare the weight of the eggs to the weight of an adult bird species for hummingbirds and ostriches only. A could have been right if the stim. mentioned the volumes of hummingbird and ostriches.
B. I immediately eliminated B b/c it's as if we are saying that ostrich eggs are bigger than hummingbird eggs. If you're reading the stim. too quickly, you would probably choose this answer. But remember that the hummingbird egg weighs more in relation to it's weight as an adult. We are not comparing the weight of a hummingbird egg to the weight of an ostrich egg.
C. It's clear by the information presented that the smaller bird species have eggs that weigh more than its adult size. In comparison to larger birds where their eggs are lighter in comparison to their adult weight.
D. and E. I eliminated for the same reason in which we never talk about the size of the eggs. Only the weight.
I hope this helped anyone out!
A lot of people in this discussion are focused on the sentence that Hollywood does not benefit from this relationship. However, let's think about what the word "cross-fertilization" means. When we fertilize a plant, it is for its own benefit. Fertilization helps a plant grow. I interpreted its meaning in this context to mean that the press helps out Hollywood studios and vice versa. In a way, they fertilize each other.
I tried my best to explain it lol.