vacuous

thank you so much for your response and advice confused potato <3

this was a great analysis. thank you!!

hello! I am in the same boat as you currently, wanted to ask if you would be willing to share if things got better for you by continuing with this method? I say this because you wrote this comment 4 weeks ago? - would love to hear your experience

Hi Kevin!!! You will be missed JY

hell yeaa!

we are soo back! yay

hhahaha

I agree Kelly! I love the fact that he uses "she" in all the examples, I am so used to hearing "him" and "his" for examples within academia so it was a nice change.

finally! i'm back! we have got this!

Colin, you are the man!! thank you for all your helpful comments in the LR section so far, they fill in gaps for me and are super helpful!!

This is the only section that has tripped me up so far, it's not intuitive like the other ones are for some reason

wassss uppp

it means to go review it because you got it wrong I believe, so its a high priority to review it to watch the explanation to see why you got it wrong

hahahah c is SO fox news love it

#feedback would love an official answer here from 7sage if possible, as I see others brought up the "comfortable" comment as well, I want to know how rigid I need to be with similar circumstances on the actual LSAT, thanks in advance!

HELP - I picked D and then in the blind review changed it to C because of the differences between the words "uncomfortable" and "comfortable" in answer D

from the stim: "but if a public place is uncomfortable, it is not well-designed, and all comfortable public places have spacious interiors"

are we able to assume that the negation of uncomfortable is comfortable? I thought there were no assumptions on Must be True, answers had to be directly from the text. Wouldn't the negation of "uncomfortable" be "not un-comfortable"

on the range of comfortable, there is:

1) uncomfortable

2) NOT uncomfortable

3) kind of comfortable

4) etc.

5) etc.

6)comfortable

or should I be focusing on the fact that C was taking a bigger risk by saying Most coffee houses as we don't know how much of coffee houses make up the superset of public places

hi! I would also like to know the answer to this, thank you!

#feedback would love videos to come back for long text sections :)

Just pointing out something that I assume may come up on or apply to a future LR lesson?

I made a note about the use of "HOME" instead of "NURSING HOME" in sentence 3/ premise 2...

Keeping the ideal experiment practice in mind could we say that premise 2 stating that pets "make one's time at HOME more rewarding" does not strengthen the argument that time with a pet at a NURSING HOME is rewarding. In the context it states that MANY nursing homes have prohibitions against having pets so the argument would be better suited with data directly from NURSING HOMES from the subset of many that do allow pets?

Or maybe I am doing too much detective work and reading a bit much into details and just finished my second coffee and need to chill. lol

agreed, I would love to drill on the formal arguments!

I will score a 175+ on the April LSAT - thank you for the motivation brad <3

hear me out, for Q4: if you were really determined to use the rule and exception framework could you change the "if it shelters more than 50 animals" to "unless it shelters 50 or less than 50 animals"

exception becomes: "shelters that shelter 50 or less than 50 animals"

rule: adoption centers with 10 years of continuous operations --> supported by mittens foundation

or am I just making it more convoluted and making it so that the argument loses its meaning?

I like to think of it as the "winner" is the A or B that applies most to the quality being compared. @patriamv

same here!