I was torn between C and D, and (of course) I chose C, so I wanted to figure out a better way of understanding the difference between the two with an analogy (and there are some good ones already in this comment section).

So let's say you want to lose weight, and you decide that running is the best way to do it.

Answer Choice C says you didn't consider that other exercises like strength training or bike riding could also help you lose weight. It says that you're overlooking other possible effective methods to reach your goal. You had tunnel vision and didn't think about other exercises at all.

Correct Answer D says you believe that running isn't just a good method but is actually the best and most effective method for everyone to lose weight. All well and good, but here's the problem: You didn't consider that for some people, other exercises might be more effective due to personal preferences, physical conditions, or other factors. So, D says you assumed running was the best method for everyone's weight loss goals, and you didn't think about the individual differences that might make other exercises better for other people.

If all of this makes sense, then D directly addresses the flaw that one method (running) is universally the best, which is a stronger and more specific criticism compared to just noting that you didn't consider other methods (Answer Choice C).

I love that we, as pre-law school LSAT prep students, are hyped about this bar exam question now, when in a few years we're gonna be all, "Whyyyyyyy were we so excited?"

I also got tripped up by A until I put words in Tony and Keisha's mouths and sketched out an example.

Tony: "There have been 4 anarchists who have performed violent acts, but there have been 38 people from other ideologies who have performed violent acts. That's a lot worse. The public shouldn't associate anarchism with violence."

Keisha: "But you're not looking at the proportion/percentages. Sure, 4 anarchists have been violent, but there have been 5 total anarchists. If 4 out of 5 of them have been violent, that's 80% of anarchists who have been violent. On the other hand, you mentioned 38 people from other ideologies who have been violent. That sounds like a lot, but not if there are 95 total people from other ideologies. If 38 out of 95 people from other ideologies have been violent, that's only 40% of them. So, it kind of makes sense that the public would associate violence with anarchism."

Total Anarchists: 5

Violent Anarchists: 80% (4 out of 5)

Total Other Ideologies: 95

Violent Other Ideologies: 40% (38 out of 95)

The linguist is essentially saying, "These tests make some people think that these bilingual kids have a smaller vocabulary, but they actually have a larger one. The reason why it may seem like they knew fewer words is because they're only writing down one word for a concept (in one language) when they actually know two words (in two different languages) for that same concept."

For example:

Regular Kid

Tree

Book

Dog

Juice

Chicken Parm

Unicycle

6 words total per the vocab test

Bilingual Kid

Tree (also knows Arbol)

Book (also knows Libro)

Dog (also knows Perro)

Juice (also knows Jugo)

N/A (doesn't know Chicken Parm in either language)

N/A (doesn't know Unicycle in either language)

4 words total per the vocab test

8 words bilingually