In this case, we were able to automatically rule out any ACs that were comparative since the stimulus itself wasn't. I wouldn't suggest applying this method of POE to all principle questions in general. Just keep it in mind to use when you come across similar cases.

Among the ACs, we have to pick the best option that serves as an alternate hypothesis to the phenomenon presented in the stimulus.

In this case, the phenomenon is that historically, people reject new technological innovations despite them improving their working conditions.

The hypothesis suggested in the stimulus to explain this phenomenon is that social inertia has more influence on human behavior than people's desire for comfort or safety.

The question stem asks us to choose the AC which most seriously undermines the reasoning provided in the stimulus. The ACs presented will all present different hypotheses to explain the phenomenon. Our job is to find the one that acts as the best alternative hypothesis. In this case, it would be answer choice A - "People correctly believe that technological innovations often cause job loss."

Answer choice A is correct because, among the ACs, it does the best job of providing al alternative hypotheses to explain why people reject new technological innovations despite them improving their working conditions.

I hope I was of any help. Good luck studying.

I haven't taken the exam before. Do they offer underlining/highlighting tools?

Started my LSAT study journey (which began with this curriculum) 3 weeks ago. I'm scheduled to take the exam for the first time in September (2024)...

Wishing luck to you all.

I initially chose B. After watching the explanation video, here is my understanding of why B is incorrect:

So, we have the rule that members of VideoKing's Frequent Viewers Club who have not rented 10+ videos can receive their coupon at the Main Street location. However, we don't actually know whether some members have rented less than 10 videos or not. All we know is that there is a rule that enables this subset of members to receive a special coupon.

However, we do know from the info in the stimulus that people who aren't members of the Club can receive a special coupon. How? Well, Pat gives us this info. Though Pat doesn't follow either of the two rules listed out for members, he is still able to receive the coupon. This allows us to infer that non-members can also receive a coupon.

So, while B could be true, we know that D must be true.

I hope this explanation makes sense and helps. Good luck!

I wish we could somehow write on the drills in the same way JY does. The highlighting and underlining tools are useful, but when it comes to conditionals, I find myself wanting to annotate more on the stimulus. Makes me wish I were working on paper. Some tool that would allow us to do this directly in the drill would be cool.

#feedback

Hey, so Ramona is arguing that students who choose technical majors miss out on the opportunity for intellectual growth because their classes don't expose them to a wide range of topics like the classes that non-technical majors would take.

Martin disagrees with her on this, saying that she's not considering the fact that technical majors are actually required to take some liberal arts classes. He argues that because technical majors do indeed take some liberal arts classes per requirement, they do not miss out on the opportunity for intellectual growth through exposure to a large range of topics. Therefore, it is implied that if these students were to not have said requirement, they would miss out on the opportunity. Meaning, Martin agrees that classes offered to technical majors don't expose students to a wide range of topics.

I tried my best to explain, I hope this makes sense and assists your understanding. Good luck!

I don't understand. First JY said that the English major isn't a technical major, but then he says that that clause ("My brother graduated last year as an English major, but he's working as a waiter") is used as support in Martin's counter-argument (that technical jobs do not improve chances on the job market). How does this make sense? How would that clause support Martin's argument if we initially said English isn't a technical major?!

I'm sorry, could someone please clarify for me? I'm so confused.

Thank you in advance. #help

#feedback Answer choice B keeps glitching during the drill. It's super distracting and the only way to make it stop is by contracting the text, but then that keeps me from being able to read the whole sentence. Please fix.

#feedback #help

For question 9, I kicked “in surrounding counties” into the domain and focused on “where hunting is permitted, the size of the deer population has not increased in the last eight years.”

==

Conditional indicator: where (group 1, sufficient)

Clause 1: Hunting permitted

Clause 2: Population size has not increased

Symbol clause 1: HP

Symbol clause 2: /SI

HP→/SI

SI→/HP

Hunting being permitted is a sufficient condition for the deer population's size not increasing. In our hypothetical scenario, hunting may be assisting in the control of the deer population. However, other conditions, such as maybe climate change etc, may also be attributing to no increase.

==

The answer says this question was not a conditional. Could I get some feedback on my approach, please? I'm confused being I feel like this would work. Thank you in advance!

Your comment made me think of a trick to remember these ideas..!

In recap...

• Necessity = Superset ... Membership in a superset is necessary for membership in a subset, but not sufficient

• Sufficiency = Subset ... Membership in a subset is sufficient for membership in a superset, but not necessary

When imagining the diagrams from the lesson, in the case of necessity where we go from subset to superset, the arrow would be pointing upwards↑. This is the same movement from going from south to north, we go upwards. Necessity starts with an n just like north. So, when dealing with a relationship and you're imagining the diagram, if the arrow is going up ↑north, it's a necessity.

Vice versa for sufficiency. In a sufficient relationship, the arrows move downwards↓ from the superset to the subset. Basically, from north to south. Sufficiency starts with an s just like south. So, when dealing with a relationship and you're imagining the diagram, if the arrow is going down ↓south, it's sufficient.

I tried to explain this trick the best I could, I hope it may help others.