We're getting all the negatives of this without the free computers!

I missed all but the first the question on this passage lol

wording on this answer suuuucks

How would you classify this question stem? I feel like I haven't seen anything like it. is that why its in misc? Is this just like argument part

#help (Added by Admin)

Hi. Sorry if I do not explain this right butt this but the test is purely on logical thinking. So I always slip up too when the answer is logically sound but it isn't true in our world. But you gotta take whatever you know and throw it out the window. Just look at the answer solely as "if this is true, does this answer help explain this? Is this suffficient/necessary? etc." Its hard to read something we know to be false and choose it as the answer. But in the LSAT world nothing is false unless it is inconsistent with the question. They can literally say "There are more humans on the moon than on Earth" and if that fits into a question it can be right even though it is so conceptually wrong.

So the reason this answer is right is because the experienced readers had a technique to pronounce words and therefore the order mattered. They got more tired or whatever on the second task. But beginner students consistently did worse on the list part no matter the order because they RELIED on context to pronounce some words. Assuming this is true, those kids could only figure out hard words in the paragraph part. They did not have another way to do better when the words are separate.

I hope this helps. Gig em!

cheeky bastards

I thought the flaw was that if you are convicted, you are also indicted. That So really 85% would agree with the conviction -> resignation. I couldn't pick an answer based of that but I stretched "D" out in my head to kind of mean what I wanted it to lol. But looking back at the "only if" makes it a whole different premise. Tough one but makes sense, gotta watch out for those modifiers

I am super late replying to this but it just seems to be because it is an old test. i've never seen a newer test with answers worded so ambiguously.

Mistook the proposal as a requirement to build apartments

the incorrect chain in my head:

build houses -> w/s -> proposal.

Where I went wrong is that the proposal is sufficient to fix the w/s right? Like they can possibly do that even if the proposal doesn't pass?

Got tripped up with E because I mistook "unpublished manuscript" with "submitted but not accepted."

My issue is with the phrasing of "The most powerful theory" and then the counter that "most theories contain theoretical objects." Is the author saying that all theories fall into the category of the most powerful theories. In that case the answer is clear as day. But I think there is something I can not wrap my head around between the different theories. Or its just a strengthen question and i'm overthinking...

#help

I do not like this question. Maybe i am not grasping it right. I avoided B because the approach says they should use the MOST explanatory powerful theories. Then it said most theories have theoretical objects. Most powerful theories does not equal most theories so I thought that B was trying to trick us by giving us a obvious misleading answer. But i guess its not misleading.

Lets say theres 100 theories. 80 percent have theoretical objects. But 20 of them are the most powerful and not theoretical. Can't we just say the 20 theories can include real objects and not the other 80? Does that 80 have to include powerful theories

This one made no sense before the explanation. Got it right cus it just seemed like the right answer. Still do not like it

JY has a couple not so PC things he says like that lol. Pretty normal talk here in America though

I thought it was "A" because the argument assumes the dog came from either peru to mexico or vice versa. If A was false, couln't the dogs have came from spain to both mexico and peru?

Was trying to reply to the main question. Not sure how to delete this

I think thats exactly why it is correct. It is a required argument and its right under our noses

This was hard for me because I switched my focus from what the manager was doing to what the workers were doing. instead I tried to illustrate the principle that "workers who have responsibility can be more effective" or something. But that is just plain wrong. Once I saw the answer I was like ooooh yeah woops. Wouldve been a gimme if i saw it right

My original problem with E was that I thought "oh, its 30 years later, so maybe the technology is just better now and it could be same or lower levels of carbon dioxide even if the air is replenished less frequently." I would still pick E because all the other answers are definitely wrong, but I have trouble justifying E 100%. Does anyone know where my error of reasoning is? Over inference? Should I just take it face value when they say the less replenishing, the more CO2?

#help

.

LETS KILL THIS TEST!!!!!!