User Avatar
mbaso13
Joined
Sep 2025
Subscription
Coach

Admissions profile

LSAT
Not provided Goal score: 174
CAS GPA
Not provided
1L START YEAR
2027

Applications

Emory
Intend to apply
Georgia
Intend to apply
Indiana Bloomington
Intend to apply
Kansas
Intend to apply
Kentucky
Intend to apply
Loyola - Chicago
Intend to apply
Michigan
Intend to apply
Missouri - Kansas City
Intend to apply
Northwestern
Intend to apply
Ohio State
Intend to apply
Southern Methodist
Intend to apply
Tennessee
Intend to apply
Texas A&M
Intend to apply
UChicago
Intend to apply
Vanderbilt
Intend to apply
Villanova
Intend to apply
Wisconsin
Intend to apply

Discussions

PrepTests ·
PT144.S2.Q21
User Avatar
mbaso13
Thursday, Mar 12

@MK2323 I don't think so. I think for AC C to be correct, there would have to be an implication that them splitting up and going to multiple restaurants after the movie is an option, which is not the flaw or suggested possibility in C. The issue with the original argument is that it's mistaking that just because a thing on its own can't address the problem, doesn't mean multiple things can't address the problem together.

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?