Inference from A is that Versatool has just more number of functions. But if these functions are never needed/infrequently used, even if Versatool does include these unncessary functions, we dont know if we will need addiotnal tools less often or not. In other words, if Versatool can perform all the necessary tools, even w/ infrequent/unncessary tools, we may or may not still need additional tool.

As for D: if this fact were to be considered that Versatool does not perform as many needed/necessary functions as other tools do, Versatool indeed would require additional tools more often. This would weaken the conclusion. Hence, the answer to this flaw question.

Awww! Thank you!!!

@jmarmaduke96714 I came to Canada to take March and April LSAT because they aren't administered in my home country- Now, I am debating whether I should just go home again because all flights and being suspended. Assuming the April LSAT will be cancelled, I am wondering if I should stay to see if they will offer any alternatives........

Thank you!

This was going to be my first LSAT to apply to a few schools still accepting applications for Fall 2020. Will this affect negatively to my admission? Any advice? I've emailed some schools and all they say is: we won't review your application until your LSAT.....

Prephrase: high quality writing are often misunderstood. Judicial decisions is not high quality (aka, not misunderstood often) and determine laws. On the other hand, dissenting opinions in appendix of some written judicial decisions are often high quality (=misunderstood). Why?

Unlike, the judicial decisions that need to be precise and definitive on what law is, dissenting opinions do not determine anything about law. They are just opinions by a set of judges who arent pleased w/ the decisions.

—> C: the law is not to any great extent to be determined by dissenting opinions.

#help

why isn't the relationship between Original Idea + Influential just valid arrow relationship? b/c when you exclude 20th Art←s→Great Art, you are left with just Great Art-----> OI + I?

Is the answer E wrong b/c if "some Wednesdays" were to be translated as all Wednesdays and sentence says "not offer 1/2 priced coffee"? In that case, this is definitely only could be true, x must be true. The stimulus says that on W--most-->1/2 priced coffee, which could also mean W-->1/2 priced coffee. If it were W-->1/2 priced coffee, how could Zack offer some/all Wednesdays with no 1/2 priced coffee?

Hope this makes sense.

JY says, in regards to E, b/c on on most Wednesday 1/2 coffee is offered, it could be true that on all Wednesday.

In his valid argument, "Some" lecture, he says that b/c the definition of some is "at least one" and could mean "possibly all," doesn't that mean E could also mean that on all Wednesday, 1/2 priced coffee is offered?

I struggle so much w/ valid inferences. Please #help

It's the conclusion. C is combining premise and conclusion into one sentence while the question is a sufficient assumption. A new assumption, if added, would make the transition from P to C proper.

the first sentence/conclusion in the stimulus states "Anger in response to insults are unreasonable". Hence, I thought the answer choice C was a restatement.

Isnt C a restatement of the premise? Which in that case, cannot be an assumption?

#help (Added by Admin)

Definitely and highly interested!!

#help

Can someone please explain how this mistaken negation is explained as (D): there are other easy ways to impress intellectuals that do not involve knowing history? What does this mean? How is this a representation of mistaken negation?

The best/easier answer choice would have been: confuses sufficient condition as necessary condition, right?

Hi! I am interested- Planning on taking March LSAT!

Interested, if not full!!

I would like to join, via Skype!