Why is E wrong? I read the passage as that since awarding a disproportionate amount would erode the amount awarded to the plaintiff, it would also be more than the judge/jury intended as this would mean the amount they had in mind for the plaintiff is less

Can someone describe the difference between C and D meaning wise? is it that c is specifically in a genre and d is in literature generally which is why C is more specific

I'm not sure I even fully understood the question lol. What is the second sentence saying? I think it is saying that since naturally occuring 7 day cycles can't cause the changes it has to be a human-caused 7 day cycle. Anyways, crazy question

How does organic farming spread without farmers not choosing to adopt it? I thought the two were synonymous in this case.

other people have mentioned both of these before, but I wanted to see if anyone had a definete explaination for either:

1) I thought A would be a fake-out specifically because the passage mentions the increase since the 1960s and the answer only explains the increase since the 1970s, and its a common tactic for the LSAT to get you on dates. Why are we supposed to ignore this in this instance?

2) I interpreted the part about the hunters as each hunter is killing the same amount of deer but since there are less hunters, there are less deer being killed. Are there signs or signals to differentiate circumstances where you're not supposed to interpret it this way?

I think it's also important to remember that regardless of how you do on PTs, truly anything could happen on the real exam for worse but also for better. Going into the June exam my pt scores had dropped that week. On the two pts i took prior i scored a 164 and 162 and on the actual exam I scored a 168. Sometimes these drops just happen. The LSAT is also not a knowledge based exam which makes it more subjective in my opinion, so you're not going to be seeing the same consistency in scoring as with studying for a fact/knowledge based test.

While I did end up choosing C due to the process of elim, I think this is a case of LSAT writers not paying attention during science class because a trait being due to genetics does not prove whether the ability of others to interpret a trait is genetically inherited. Sure, it could be the case that a creature has a genetic predisposition to, for example, fear a certain patterning on a poisonous insect but it could just as easily be a learned behavior, so I really don't see how it's strengthening at all. IDK maybe I'm thinking too much as a scientist and not from the LSAT perspective lol

In summary:

The passage states that the average amount paid for a new car (note: not necessarily the listed price of any given car) has gone up in comparison to individual income, and the conclusion made is that this means that individuals are paying more for a car.

However, it is weakened by E because E says that more cars are being purchased by non-individuals, who have more spending power as a collective and thus could pay more for a more expensive car, but individuals could still be paying the same amount of their income as before.

Basically, in the weakening scenario it's not that cars are getting more expensive necessarily, but that since there are more groups, more purchasers are able to shell out more money.

very unfortunate that I misread "misquotes" as "mosquitos" and thought the statement was about sound quality LOL

So in summary it's not that B is a explicitly false choice, but just that E is a more justified/stronger inference

I wouldn't do this personally. You want to maximize points and you're more likely to get the easy ones right, and I find myself getting burnt out after the hard ones. However, if it works for you and you see better scores from doing it, theres no one correct way to take the LSAT

I average around 2:30 per passage, though it usually varies +/- 30sec based on passage difficulty. I try to skim as an initial read-through and try to catch the main purpose/argument of each paragraph and then when I go answer questions, I know I'm inevitably going to have to go back and look for info, which is where i do more detailed reading knowing roughly which paragraph is relevent to the question. I also have a background in history so I've done a lot of reading and needed a similar skillset, and its one of those things that you just have to do a bunch to practice and figure out the best strat for you

Why is it a fair assumption to make that small tornados are the hardest to track? In previous science/previous knowlege based questions i've struggled with making assumptions that the lsat did not want us to make, so I am wondering why this assumption would be fair?

What I don't understand about this question is that it doesn't state that the awards committee can't happen without being followed by a general meeting? Maybe I'm reading it wrong but the statement gives a condition under which a general meeting will occur at a specified time, not any conditions about the committees? therefore, how can we assume that the two committees are mutually exclusive?

I understand the general idea of false neg/false pos, but where in the passage does it talk about a judge being wrongly removed/false pos? It discusses situations where a judge fails to recuse and makes a biased judgement, but I can't figure out how we're supposed to know the opposite occurs also

I really hesitated between C and E because I thought that C would mean that there would be more scrutiny on answers presented for suggested info, even in cases where questions asked in court weren't leading. I understand the justification for E and understand why C is wrong from the explanation, but am having trouble putting into words why my justification for C is wrong for my WAJ

I was caught up between D and E because read "you" as a more general term seeing as I found it weird to limit lifting to something only bodybuilders do, and thought that the explanations were both too in depth for body builders or the general public to care about.

I've struggled with audience questions in the past specifically relating to sci passages because my degree is in biology and I tend to overcompensate in terms of what I assume the general public doesn't know. Are there examples of passages on other practices that are targeted towards experts I could reference, or should we assume that they are never going to make us read a science passage directed towards experts as LSAT takers?

this passage ruined my pt score singlehandedly

I had initially chosen C because I thought the point was to explain the differences between monetary and specific performance and when they are applied. Upon review I have no idea why I didn't choose the option that specifically said "two" lmao

What I took away from the video is that A is correct because if the point is to prove the existing consensus to be true rather than testing a new treatment, CE would not matter since the point of CE is to ethically test new treatments. The reason E is wrong is because it is okay for individuals to have opinions under CE (which is what differentiates it from TE), but just not the medical community. Is this correct?

How are we supposed to infer that social capital = public goods? Is this common knowlege? Because it doesn't really align with the definition presented in A either (social capital = things that build community)

having similar issues! following this post and good luck :) if it makes you feel better in june I was averaging mid to low 160s PTs and scored 168 so you could also get lucky

I don't know if this is a bit too obvious but I think of it as the argument vs the intended audience, so the two are pretty different question types to me. Main point = the summary of the argument while the primary purpose = the reason the argument is being made. I'm the opposite of you lol I'm pretty good with purpose but bad at main point

for me it was not automatic and you get a 1 minute break counting into the next section to reset, drink water, etc. after which you click into the next section. The lawhub practice exam format is very similar to the test in that regard. Also note that for me, the 10 minutes between sections started automatically and the screen said I needed to be excused by a proctor. Turns out I did not because there was no way to get them over so I sat there and wasted half my break time, so ask the proctors beforehand how that will work! If you want further clarification, I'm sure someone on Youtube has talked about it and it might be worth looking at it and cross referencing sources. Also I suggest calling LSAT support to ask you specific questions, I called the week before my exam and the woman on the phone was very patient in explaining all my specific test day format questions.

Im in the same situation, ive gotten exactly 169 on the last 4 or 5 pts ive taken and just cant seem to break the 170 ceiling. I've personally been working on taking more time on LR questions and not being as stressed about the timer since theres usually one or two that upon BR I realize was a reading error on my part, but tbh idk if its worked out much considering my scores lol. Hope you find the way forward!!