my mom keeps talking about how schools are doing away with test scores including the LSAT and at first it made me discouraged like why am I doing this?? but now it's so comforting bc maybe by the time we're applying next year schools will care way less anyway!!!

and I think what's helped me the most on RC is making flashcards from the vocab words in the syllabus + adding any vocab words I found tricky during problem sets and practice tests

good luck! :)

Doesn't E make the assumption that most office workers don't get consistent physical exercise? Based on the stimulus we have as much evidence that all office workers get consistent physical exercise as we do that no office workers get consistent exercise. If most office workers get consistent exercise, then the difference can't be explained by exercise. If most don't, it can be. But how can we say that most office workers do or don't, say, go for a jog before work every day? All of the office workers in my family, for example, still get consistent physical exercise.

I super agree. I think some people could make the argument that it's a bolder assumption to assume that encouraging people to do something to help their health means they actually do it vs. that most office workers also get physical exercise, but this seems like a super unfair statement to me. In my world, most people I know would follow encouragement for preventive health measures and most office workers I know also get consistent exercise. Maybe in the LSAT writers world the opposite is true and these are bolder assumptions but that is an assumption in and of itself.

What I don't understand on this is that E seems descriptively inaccurate - the stimulus assumes most old houses have more than 1 apartment; more than one includes 3 or more.

And I don't understand why D isn't correct because yes, if each old house had multiple apartments that would be sufficient to explain why there are twice as many apartments as old houses, but it's not necessary.