#feedback Typo: "But even humdrum participants won't cut it simply because..." im assuming it was meant to be "a hundred"

#feedback

Would be nice to have a diagram that we can open up so we can print/review

I think it's because we aren't given an upper limit by using the phrase "not all" or "some are not."

Since "some" imply at least 1 but could include all it's improper to assume that you have a majority. Unless you were dealing with phrases like "most" or "majority"

#help

Why is it not an immediate assumption that one is allowed to keep the pet if it has a medical purpose? I understand that it is not explicitly stated "if the pet has a medical purpose, then it is allowed to be kept", but wouldn't the phrasing of "unless it has a medical purpose" indicate that if it does then it would be allowed?

#feedback

I feel like I don't understand how this would be useful because throughout the course so far we haven't focused on how questions or passages look on the actual LSAT. We so far have just discussed logic and arguments in a general sense. It would be very helpful for someone like me who is using this course as his or her main source of learning material if we delved into how the LSAT looks earlier and more consistently so that we understand how these lessons will apply to the test.

It is C > D but that's already given.

If A > B

If B > C

If C > D

If A > B > C > D

So we already know that it is IF C then D, but we now also know that if A then C or If A then D

I believe Jedi was the subset and Force User was the superset.

If one is a Jedi, then they are a force user

J→F

It is sufficient to be a member of the Jedi group to be considered a Jedi, however, just because one is a Force User does not necessarily mean they are a Jedi. For example (forgive me if I'm wrong in this example I have never seen Star Wars), the emperor was a force user but was not a Jedi. Hope this helps!