Q1: How did we get the "should not". Thanks.

#help (Added by Admin)

I'm a little confused why "A" would be the answer; wouldn't it be directionally wrong? Thanks in advance.

Could you please dive into a little more detail on how the "because" lead you to conclude that we needed a strengthening premise? Thanks in advance.

Thanks! I will re-review those lessons. Have a great day.

Hi - just to confirm, would the correct sentence translation be then as follows

(1): A student is chosen for Gryffindor, unless they exhibits bravery.

(2): Therefore, if a student exhibits bravery then they will be sorted into Gryffindor?

Thanks.

Can someone please explain these rules a little more in depth

1. Sufficient satisfied, necessary must be as well. (Conditional argument)

2. Necessary failed, sufficient must be as well. (Contrapositive argument)

3. Merge together the same symbol to create a chain. (Chaining conditionals)

Thanks.

#help Added by Admin

Why is the Nest in the summit of the Andes [NSA] (Sufficient) and why the highest flying birds of prey the necessary [HFBP]. Would it not be the other way around? Thanks.

#help (Added by Admin)

Thx for your time and help. Have a great day!

"It's the same distinction as between "Most cats are pets" (C —m→ P) versus "Most pets are cats" (P —m→ C)". I would appreciate if anyone could please provide an insight on how these two items are different. My understanding is, is that they mean the same thing. Thanks.

Curious... why would an author do this "points offered in concession. If an author can anticipate a point that his opponent might bring up, he might volunteer that information before making his argument.". Is it to weaken the other side? Also, what purpose would this serve on the LSAT. Thanks for your time & help.

#help (Added by Admin)

Hi 7Sage - could you please provide an example of the following. Thanks!

"Words or phrases usually followed by a premise but also contain a conclusion:

1. for

2. since

3. because"