I needed this. Thank you

I m feeling down too as I stopped for now

Damage to the self-esteem makes people being less confident especially when it happens in childhood. You tell your child you are wrong, whatever you do is bad, etc, throw him out of the house. As a result child loses confidence. Plus people around (neighbors, school) treat him bad knowing he is thrown out of the house. So, child is unsecure. A looks correct to me. Damage to self esteem done by people and home, first of all, makes a child being less confident. A can not be so easily eliminated. However, may be this is not only a home where he is punished. Significant or not this loss (under E) depends on child. Looks like A is right but E is good too.

#help

I understand the point JY makes about right AC C but the same time,

when you negate Sufficient, it doesn't follow that Necessary is also negated.

If A → B

not B→A

but

A means that argument falls apart. And B can still be a B.

A → B

A

B

So, why in that case we do not follow this logic rule?

This was so hard. In SA questions as I understood you need to Find a connecting link between Premise and Conclusion and only B does it.

Premise is talking only about such a phenomenon as Forest fires that have many good consequences.

Conclusion ads human beings being wrong to stop those fires.

Thus, a right AC should connect the premise and conclusion (human beings and their attempts to stop fires) giving a linking bridge in between.

A is wrong because there is no link with f. fires

B is right tells why people want to intervene into the natural process. Further conclusion says: hey, people, you are all wrong trying to stop fires.

C and E each wrong because they do not have the connection required.

ehh, makes if you have an assumption it could be a good argument.

ehh, have no idea why B is wrong?

#help (Added by Admin)

This is so tough. Basic strategy for all NA question is to find a missing premise that is in between Premise and main conclusion.

Premise:

Hobby helps to overcome loneliness for shy

If shy person loses interest in Hobby, his loneliness grows

Conclusion:

Developing hobby is not a successful strategy to overcome loneliness.

NA is what is missing:

If hobby was successful strategy, it will not let the loneliness to grow which is AC B.

Something like that. All NA is so understandable, may be need more practice, uuhhhh...

"Merits of opponent's argument" under D. Where is the argument itself to say that it has merits? May be it is another and more flawed argument?! So, why D is right?

#help (Added by Admin)

Although this is only 3 star difficultly question, it is tough to understand which AC is correct even after JY explanation. To me AC C and E looked attractive until I knew the right AC is B!

Negation of A, B, C breaks the argument apart, so, you can't tell which AC is right simply by negation.

Premises say:

1) In order to be an expert→you need an experience

2) For intuitive, effective response → you need experience

3) Experts have information rendered into rules and facts

4) Experts develop rules and facts by 1000s of situations

5) Computers are just collectors of information

Conclusion:

Humans are better experts than the Computers.

What is required to argument to be true?

A) Ok, but even originality is not a level of expertise. Someone may have extremely good fantasy but it doesn't mean he is an expert

B) Right because computers store information but they can not process it into rules and facts like experts do and use intuition which rule may apply. This is why humans are better experts. The connecting link is found: Computers can not render all info they have into rules and facts. The latter is needed for being an expert.

C) Yes, this is a right premise. But the same time, not all situations fall under the rules and there are varieties of them in life. Second, C has no connection to Computers. It does not connect Human experts with computer abilities like B does.

D) This is just a number of words that have no meaning to the argument

E) Very attractive because they told us before how experts are good to work with their intuition. At the same time this is confirmation of B because Intuition is not stored into computers too. Apart that, this AC doesn't talk about rules and facts, only Intuition that may be wrong sometimes. So, B is the best.

#help

Terrible explanation of 12. Why E is wrong?

Last paragraph talks that judges reconsider precedents from time to time. These judges altogether represent an institutional authority while doing such intellectual job. So, JY, why E is wrong? Only because right answer choice is B?

the best explanation

Agree, that's why I chose A

hei, thanks for this long explanation, try to see the AC C from your explanation. At least it has some kind go logical trait.

Really don't understand why C is right. I chose A because the passage talks about the dull companion who gets wrong interpretations. My answer choice A was logical that Detective (a smart guy) should find a correct solution to the puzzle. The term "most" means 50 - 100% chances. So ''often'' to me is correlated with the term "Most" which is used in AC A.

lol, me too

I chose D because I thought and still I think this is a better AC. Better law enforcement helped with fatalities.

Let's say you passed a law but everyone is ignoring it. In order a law to work you need to enforce it, for instance, putting camera and speed detectors, putting patrols on the road, etc.

So, why am I wrong?

I see everyone just say E is right but it contradicts premises.

The word "history" confused me too and I chose A. There is nothing told about the history of paintings except they had been in museum.

#help

I don't understand this explanation

lol

#help

Can anyone please help me to understand why B in Q. 8 is correct. My problem is I am not understanding what part of passage is equivalent to words "combination of training in....."intellectual history". Why we infer that there is not enough knowledge in intellectual history? I might be wrong but ..... please #help to understand, really appreciate a help.

I have "love and hate" relationships with LSAT

I am sorry, don't want to say anything disrespectful but I am not satisfied with explanation here. Listened to 10 times already. Coming up with my own thoughts.

The idea here is to establish why telescopes didn't notice the break by November although the comet became bright.

First thing to understand is that the Brightness is a result of dust and gas after break (according to the passage).

A - wrong because it doesn't explain why comet was so bright, if gas and dust comes later than Break. Contradiction here because Brightness is a result of break, gas...

B - doesn't answer, why telescopes didn't notice break? It explains why how brightness is created by refraction.

C - yes, because telescopes "thought": "oh this is just an every day gas and dust, no more anything unusual", so the telescopes didn't see anything unusual here and missed the break.

D - even if the gas and dust increased steadily, why telescoped didn't notice a break until November?

E - explains why the break happened.

I understand why C is correct but still not a good response why A is not correct? As the passage says: there are "few of the numerous articles.. that are superior" which means the rest is not (=average, or worse). Argument ignores existence of superior articles and goes to circular reasoning.

#help I listened explanation to AC D Question 9 almost 10 times and don't understand, why D is wrong?????