I spoke to a LSAC rep after being on hold for awhile. They said that it was a mistake and that if you have score preview, you will have until October 29 to decide.
Funny part of call was when I told the rep that they should send out an email or post about it because many people are confused and they responded “maybe.”
Same issue! The email said we would have until October 28th to decide and we get 6 days to decided whether to keep or cancel... So in theory, today would be correct.
For this question, I initially prephased for D. But, after reading the 'do so less frequently' I thought maybe D was too strong, saying that NOTHING requires exercising imagination. But, upon re-reading... D says "nothing fills the gap" left from radio. The 'fills the gap' leaves open that maybe some things exercise imagination, but emphasizes that nothing does so quite as much as radio and therefore you get the 'do so less frequently'
So, in-world = in the video game. Not in the real world?
#help (Added by Admin)
I noticed on Lawhub that you cannot use the arrow keys to move to the next questions and that you have to click the 'next arrow' button. Is this everyone's experience as well? I want to make sure I practice manually clicking it instead of relying on the arrow buttons.
Should I use my CAS GPA or UGPA when using the 7Sage predictor? My university treated A+'s as a straight 4.0, so my CAS GPA is higher. I just don't want to have any false pretenses about what schools are targets or reaches.
Thanks!
I really did not understand this one. But, after reading comments and descriptions, I know see my mistakes. In short, I kind of glazed of the AC's and I also did not create an accurate depiction of AC B in my head. For some reason, I thought about my own experience driving and equated "nonmoving car" to (the shitty reality) going 5 mph in crazy traffic. This was SO wrong and key to the subtlety of B.
Even if a nonmoving car pollutes half as much, it is still adding to the total pollution from one trip. This is because idling adds a 'segment' of a drive that would have not existed otherwise. And, AC B tells you that you are polluting during that nonmoving segment. If it takes you 10 minutes to drive somewhere no traffic, you will pollute X. But, now with congestion, you will literally not move an inch for an extra 5 minutes (this is where I messed up. I kept thinking in my head of a car moving slowly instead nonmoving). That 5 minutes of pollution will be added on top of the 10 minutes you have to drive to get to your destination originally.
And of course, less people = less congestion.
I think this question demonstrates the danger of speeding through without understanding. I think I probably would've guessed and moved on in an actual test. But, now I feel like I know to look out for strengthening questions (where the stim feels strong) that have AC's that add an additional benefit to one of the premises ("interaction" as JY said). And, I think I should've have paused at B for longer when I saw the word congestion. Because in my head, there is a clear connection between less people on the road and less congestion, but I just didn't visualize the first half of the AC correctly.
This explanation for D was simple and well-said. JY did not acknowledge the underlying assumption for D that I bet a lot of students make. But, we can't make that assumption! Thank you for brining this q-stem and AC back to basics. It was hard to put into words what was wrong about AC D.
Writing out my incorrect processes in case it helps anyone.
I was choosing between A and E.
A because I thought it suggested that the narrower wood was sturdier and probably nicer. Way too big of an assumption.
E because it seemed to show that floors are a status symbol. But, this does not do much or anything for the argument about narrow floor boards specifically.
When I looked back at the stim after BR, I realized very quickly what B was saying. I think one clue here is that the stim says "bigger" versus "smaller" houses, not just "rich" versus "poor." Bigger implies that more floorboards are needed. I should've slowed down on stim and thought more about possible loophole's/assumptions.
(I know this is VERY late, but this will help someone else)
I did the same thing! I realized that I was focusing solely on proving what was in the conclusion. That the "specific patterns" are what draw them to the web. When re-reading the stimulus, I realized that the premise simply says "which reflect UV" in reference to the insects. I made the mistake of glossing over this and thinking the premise said "because the webs reflect UV." This makes a huge difference in the argument because we cannot assume that the UV light is what draws the insects to the webs. If you misread the premise to think it does say this, then you miss the biggest hole in the argument.
Because I misread, I then completely focused on proving the conclusion, which seemed to be about specific patterns, because I thought it was a given that the insects were attracted to them because of UV light. This is why I chose D. But, we need to prove that UV light is what brought them to webs (an even more basic assumption) and that is why E is correct.
Really just a matter of slowing down and not letting your brain make conclusions that are not written.
Thanks. This really helped. The “All” versus ‘not always (learn in their preferred method)’ threw me off at first. But, it makes when we consider that some children work better with communal and some independent. And Pat is saying they need to learn both; this means that sometimes children will be working with their preferred method and sometimes won’t (hence, ‘not always’).
I had forgotten about precedent and for some reason felt like the physician's choice would not affect their own result in a malpractice suit... Silly mistake.
I switched my answer from E to C on BR because I thought I was making too many logical leaps and assumptions by selecting E. But, upon reflection of C, it is clear that this is not the main point of disagreement. If it was, then Lurano would have said something about it in his second sentence, instead of bringing up a new consideration.
https://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-preptest-35/logical-reasoning-2/q-23/
^^^ This helped me understand that the ‘older/wiser’ relationship is not as solid because it isn’t definitive unless we know that everyone starts off with the same wisdom. Whereas the tree ring si very explicit that if you are older, you will have more tree rings.
https://forum.powerscore.com/lsat/viewtopic.php?t=11730
This forum (link above) helped me a bit more. I hope it helps others.
@JY, can you please add a section focusing on the proportion/percentage questions? I think they deserve more time than you gave here.
#help
Hi me too!