I don't understand fully why the first sentence is not the main conclusion. It seems like it's being supported by the rest of the sentences. Does anyone have an alternate explanation for this question? #help

To generalize this to future LSAT questions, if you get a premise that's conditional and a conclusion that's absolute, are you supposed to look for an answer choice that either triggers the conditional premise or triggers the opposite of it? #help

I’m in a similar situation but my GPA is .05 below the 25th percentile of one of my dream schools. Any advice?

Also, do admissions officers account for difficulty in curriculum at different universities and colleges? My college had curves for very class so no more than X people could get a 4.0 in any given class.

Following. I've been using 7Sage as my primary method for August but am planning to incorporate Demon for Nov.

I didn't take "living conditions" to mean money. I thought they could be a variety of things like in real life (ex: access to goods and services, public transit, affordability of housing, etc.). So I didn't even think about a dollar comparison. I selected A and thought maybe some people value certain things while others value different ones. So maybe the country values the efficiency of bus routes, but people in L only care about the number of Tesla charging ports (because they're super rich lol)

I'm looking for a study buddy to review PTs with. My highest PT is 163 and my BR is 168-170. I'm in eastern time and available after 5pm EST on weekdays and anytime on weekends.

I'm interested. My highest PT is 163 and highest BR is 170 and I'm trying to get to 173-175 ish. Like @ I work 9-5pm as well but am free weekday nights and weekends. My best sections are LR, LG, RC, respectively.

I found an alternative explanation that may help people: the conclusion says government by referendum tends to diminish the welfare of society. But why would that be if more people are voting on issues? Because they won't go for the large projects. So it has to be true that the large projects sometimes help welfare, and that's why referendum tends to diminish welfare.

#help I was able to cross out all the incorrect answers, but E still doesn't look right to me. I don't understand how the entire plant could have emerged due to 2 organisms merging together. I don't see a place where this is supported in the passage. Can someone please explain further?

I'm stuck in the 162-163 plateau at the moment. Did the above tips work for anyone who commented 10+ months ago? I've been doing drills on questions I'm weak at and revisiting sections of the CC as needed. I also picked up my Loophole and LSAT Trainer books again, but nothing seems to be helping with LR. I'm currently stuck at -5/-6

I got stuck eliminating D and E. Can someone explain why those are wrong?

interested :smile:

I'm not 100% sure on this one and am looking for a better explanation, but I selected A in BR. I thought the second rational was based on fairness, b/c the passage uses words like "just" and "appropriate" to describe this view. I'm not sure what consequences is supposed to mean though. #Help

Does anyone have a better explanation for why C and D are wrong on question 22? For D the timeframe seems wrong to me, but on C the timeframe is correct. Or is it simply that B is the best answer as compared to the other choices which necessarily means C and D were eliminated... #help

I took "almost every" to mean "some" instead of "most" and chose the more conservative answer, E. I can see why E is wrong for other reasons but does almost every = most on the LSAT generally speaking? #help

#help For A, it doesn't say if the landlord has extenuating circumstances or not. Is it okay to assume they don't?

I'm interested too