Subscription pricing
seems like it's an option for people i know. hope it helps :)
PT Questions
nzudrak518
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
nzudrak518
Tuesday, Nov 30 2021
@ said:
(E) says that "There are some societies where there exists no concept of blame;" however, this could not possibly weaken Passage B's argument.
Elsewhere in the passage, one of the authors writes that "rehabilitation" (i.e. non-blame-focused) judicial systems dominated in the mid-twentieth-century, but this resulted in a huge blame-focused backlash in subsequent decades.
These societies had "no concept of blame," but they ended up seeing the consequences of that later.
Someone help me out?
Yea you are assuming that because they have rehabilitation that they have no concept of blame; it's quite a reach. Criminal justice experts may realize that criminal behavior is not to blame, but that doesn't mean they have no concept of blame. Or as bizarre as it may be, the public in these society have no concept of blame but want to do it this way since it could be a tradition. If some have no concept of blame while others do; it is still quite hard to reach a conclusion that the society as a whole that have these 2 kinds of people have no concept of blame. We just don't know these societies have no concept of blame or not.
nzudrak518
Sunday, Jun 27 2021
You are right the AC A has a percentage v. number flaw. An increase in number doesn't always equal an increase in percentage or vice versa.
Back to the sitmulus, there could be no correlation whatsoever. Rise in percentage of young people who dropped out of highschool can include freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors (18 year old).
With C we know that the percentage of highschool graduates (18 year old) rose which means percentage of highschool dropouts actually decreased. It is safe to assume this because (1) the premise said 18 year olds can only be either graduates or dropouts, and (2) percentage is always equal to 1 or 100% and a decrease in one guarantees an increase in another.
Taken C as true, then the rise in percentage of young people who dropped out high school is due to other class standings and not those who are 18 year olds.
nzudrak518
Friday, Aug 27 2021
@ said:
The first interpretation of the question can be paraphrased like this: "Which of the following is a hypothesis that Q's response supports and also counters the evidence presented by M?" The second interpretations can be paraphrased as such: "Which of the following is a hypothesis that M's evidence supports that can also be countered by Q. The difference is that in the first interpretation, the clause [in support of which one of the following hypotheses] is completely separate from the others. In the second interpretation, the clause [in support of which one of the following hypotheses] is embedded within the clause [any use by M of the evidence about 85-90 year-olds in support of which one of the following hypotheses].
The 2nd interpretation is preferred/correct because the 1st interpretation is descriptively wrong. M didn't counter the evidence but provided additional evidence that did not contradict Q's evidence.
nzudrak518
Wednesday, Aug 24 2022
You could send the LSAC support an email asking about this question and saved the response for future references. I showed my proctor at the beginning that I was allowed to use ctrl + F.
nzudrak518
Sunday, Jul 18 2021
@ said:
The opposite of weakening is strengthening. If you reduce the proportion of the people too much, the answer will become irrelevant or a strengthening answer and thus is incorrect.
50/50 could be irrelevant
Changing the answer to "Sales to individuals make up most (or more than 50%) of new car sales" makes the answer a strengthening answer.
I disagree with both conclusions here. JY discusses the importance of the specific proportion of individual buyers to non-individual buyers in the part of the explanation video that discusses AC E (starts 2:40).
The important takeaway is: as long as the proportion exists, the answer is correct. In the video JY changes AC E so it says: "Sales to individuals make up only a proportion of all new-car sales," then states that this AC would still be correct.
Each of these hypothetical AC E's would be correct:
"Sales to individuals make up 99% of all car sales."
"Sales to individuals make up 50% of all car sales."
"Sales to individuals make up 1% of all car sales."
"Some car sales are made to buyers who are not individuals."
In order for the argument in the stimulus to work, the author needs the assumption "100% of car buyers are individuals." So absolutely any AC challenging that assumption will weaken.
In terms of one hypothetical answer being more weakening than the other- that kind of comparison gets subjective and messy very quickly. People have different opinions on what sorts of metrics determine one thing to be more or less weakening, and some people would dispute that two weakening things can differ in degree in the first place.
My own approach to the topic is 'don't worry about it'. To get the question right, we don't care a single bit about whether one hypothetical answer is more weakening than another; the LSAT will never make us choose the most weakening AC out of two weakening ACs. This is a consequence of the one-right-answer principle.
You are right. The answer choice compared the individuals with themselves of 25 years ago and through that we know the percentage of sales to individuals are shrinking, which means other types are increasing in term of percentages.
As a result, changing the strength of the answer choice will still be correct.
nzudrak518
Sunday, Jul 18 2021
@ said:
@ said:
@ It seems like you recognized the Concept Shift in the stimulus, but are just having trouble applying it to the answer.
In the stimulus, we're told:
Avg price paid for a new car has increased (compared to avg individual income)
But then the conclusion conflates price paid with individuals purchasing cars.
It very well could be that the price paid has only increased for non-individuals (e.g. corporations), and thus individuals' price paid has remained the same relative to their individual income.
Remember, it's a weakener, so it doesn't necessarily have to prove the conclusion 100% false.
Hope that helps!
If the scenario in my original question were true, would that make the answer choice less of a weakener? If it’s just the amount that individuals or non individuals pay for the cars that drive up the price then why does the proportion of each group matter? Is it because the stimulus is talking about average price and not just exact price?
The opposite of weakening is strengthening. If you reduce the proportion of the people too much, the answer will become irrelevant or a strengthening answer and thus is incorrect.
50/50 could be irrelevant
Changing the answer to "Sales to individuals make up most (or more than 50%) of new car sales" makes the answer a strengthening answer.
nzudrak518
Tuesday, Aug 17 2021
@ said:
@ said:
Hi there, can we do online study group on Zoom or Discord?
We can opt for that as well, but I personally don't see a point given that we are all studying for our own thing.
Do practice tests or sections without checking the answers before.
During live session, Zoom or discord, compare answers and defend your answers as to why you think those were the right answers.
Then check the right answers, that's how I envision studying together would be.
nzudrak518
Monday, Aug 16 2021
Hi there, can we do online study group on Zoom or Discord?
nzudrak518
Wednesday, May 12 2021
Are you saying that the risk of you getting schizophrenia may affect the decision of adcom to admit you? For sure they don't reject you based on this reason alone. Unless you specifically tell them that you are having schizophrenia and refuse to medicate or something to that effect. Hmmm
nzudrak518
Tuesday, May 11 2021
You forgot everyday texts are not perfect. This statement is ambiguous. That's how people get sued or why amendments are made.
nzudrak518
Thursday, Nov 11 2021
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
For 13, B is supported by passage A that markets help people share information quickly and accurately. A is more like a common assumption?
For 22, the task is to find a strengthening answer that supports an increase in number of species being associated with an increase in those that need protection. We know that splitters support increasing number of species, and E says that the proponent of the splitter theory are actually pushing for reclassification of species that they know are endangered.
What do you mean by common assumption? And I know what E is saying my problem is how does that even relate to what we are being asked to do?
Oh it may be wrong for me to call it a common assumption, may be something that could be most strongly supported by the question stem is better. It doesn't mean anything besides it's an inference (not a MBT kinda one) after reading the question stem and without taking into consideration of the info discussed in passage A.
About 22, um because if splitter people actively focus on a subset of species that are endangered, it will make the highlighted sentence more likely don't you think? If they focus on those who are not endangered, doing so may not increase species that need protection.
Eh I don’t really understand your explanation for A at all. Did you also get the question wrong? As for E, I disagree. I thought E was completely irrelevant and took the answer out.
I got both of them right :D If it's too hard you can try process of elimination.
You can ask yourself if A supports any passage. To me it doesn't seem to support passage A at all.
For 22, I am not sure how E is irrelevant if you truly understand what it said like you said though.
Well if I understood why E was correct I wouldn’t have posted. And I did ask myself whether A was supported by the passage for number 13 and my answer was yes and that’s why I got the question wrong.
Maybe let's try this one method. I think it's helpful for our future as well.
Try to think like a lawyer and gather evidence or provide reasoning to defend why you think for 13, A is supported by the passage. I said no and present my reasoning: AC A doesn't really touch on the main point of passage A.
For 22, could you let me know why you think E is irrelevant? If you got the question stem, understood the highlighted sentence, and understood what AC E said, it's really hard to not realize it's a correct answer, much less thinking it's irrelevant.
lol. It would be perfect if I just understood the question stem and E popped out wouldn’t it? But it didn’t. I didn’t think what the p people thought was relevant. So what if they thought in this certain way? Why would that mean the number of endangered species would increase? And 13 isn’t a main point question. I picked A because I thought the situation in the question stem supported passage A because it showed that the market was self correcting. Passage A talked about how there was insider information that was correct and the information quickly spread which I thought matched what was given in the stem perfectly and so I picked A.
I think we’re talking in circles. I’ve put in a request for help.
Um, where in passage A talking about self-correcting? I know that it's not a main point question, but I think it would help you since you kinda didn't get what passage A is talking about.
nzudrak518
Thursday, Nov 11 2021
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
For 13, B is supported by passage A that markets help people share information quickly and accurately. A is more like a common assumption?
For 22, the task is to find a strengthening answer that supports an increase in number of species being associated with an increase in those that need protection. We know that splitters support increasing number of species, and E says that the proponent of the splitter theory are actually pushing for reclassification of species that they know are endangered.
What do you mean by common assumption? And I know what E is saying my problem is how does that even relate to what we are being asked to do?
Oh it may be wrong for me to call it a common assumption, may be something that could be most strongly supported by the question stem is better. It doesn't mean anything besides it's an inference (not a MBT kinda one) after reading the question stem and without taking into consideration of the info discussed in passage A.
About 22, um because if splitter people actively focus on a subset of species that are endangered, it will make the highlighted sentence more likely don't you think? If they focus on those who are not endangered, doing so may not increase species that need protection.
Eh I don’t really understand your explanation for A at all. Did you also get the question wrong? As for E, I disagree. I thought E was completely irrelevant and took the answer out.
I got both of them right :D If it's too hard you can try process of elimination.
You can ask yourself if A supports any passage. To me it doesn't seem to support passage A at all.
For 22, I am not sure how E is irrelevant if you truly understand what it said like you said though.
Well if I understood why E was correct I wouldn’t have posted. And I did ask myself whether A was supported by the passage for number 13 and my answer was yes and that’s why I got the question wrong.
Maybe let's try this one method. I think it's helpful for our future as well.
Try to think like a lawyer and gather evidence or provide reasoning to defend why you think for 13, A is supported by the passage. I said no and present my reasoning: AC A doesn't really touch on the main point of passage A.
For 22, could you let me know why you think E is irrelevant? If you got the question stem, understood the highlighted sentence, and understood what AC E said, it's really hard to not realize it's a correct answer, much less thinking it's irrelevant.
nzudrak518
Thursday, Nov 11 2021
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
For 13, B is supported by passage A that markets help people share information quickly and accurately. A is more like a common assumption?
For 22, the task is to find a strengthening answer that supports an increase in number of species being associated with an increase in those that need protection. We know that splitters support increasing number of species, and E says that the proponent of the splitter theory are actually pushing for reclassification of species that they know are endangered.
What do you mean by common assumption? And I know what E is saying my problem is how does that even relate to what we are being asked to do?
Oh it may be wrong for me to call it a common assumption, may be something that could be most strongly supported by the question stem is better. It doesn't mean anything besides it's an inference (not a MBT kinda one) after reading the question stem and without taking into consideration of the info discussed in passage A.
About 22, um because if splitter people actively focus on a subset of species that are endangered, it will make the highlighted sentence more likely don't you think? If they focus on those who are not endangered, doing so may not increase species that need protection.
Eh I don’t really understand your explanation for A at all. Did you also get the question wrong? As for E, I disagree. I thought E was completely irrelevant and took the answer out.
I got both of them right :D If it's too hard you can try process of elimination.
You can ask yourself if A supports any passage. To me it doesn't seem to support passage A at all.
For 22, I am not sure how E is irrelevant if you truly understand what it said like you said though.
nzudrak518
Thursday, Nov 11 2021
@ said:
Oh not E I mean D
Oh that's what I chose as well.
The premise that can guarantee the truth of the conclusion in this case should include this: if you can't travel back in time where the language was spoken, your mastery of that language can't be perfect.
A guarantee of the truth of the conclusion is deductive reasoning.
Just noticed that this argument has a loophole because it's missing the above. This question can be a sufficient/necessary assumption one too.
nzudrak518
Thursday, Nov 11 2021
@ said:
@ said:
For 13, B is supported by passage A that markets help people share information quickly and accurately. A is more like a common assumption?
For 22, the task is to find a strengthening answer that supports an increase in number of species being associated with an increase in those that need protection. We know that splitters support increasing number of species, and E says that the proponent of the splitter theory are actually pushing for reclassification of species that they know are endangered.
What do you mean by common assumption? And I know what E is saying my problem is how does that even relate to what we are being asked to do?
Oh it may be wrong for me to call it a common assumption, may be something that could be most strongly supported by the question stem is better. It doesn't mean anything besides it's an inference (not a MBT kinda one) after reading the question stem and without taking into consideration of the info discussed in passage A.
About 22, um because if splitter people actively focus on a subset of species that are endangered, it will make the highlighted sentence more likely don't you think? If they focus on those who are not endangered, doing so may not increase species that need protection.
nzudrak518
Thursday, Nov 11 2021
@ said:
@ said:
Yes the first sentence is the conclusion. And yes it is the contrast between ancient and modern languages. I got this question wrong too (+_+') \
Why isn’t it E?
Because there is no premise supporting it to be a sub conclusion.
nzudrak518
Thursday, Nov 11 2021
Yes the first sentence is the conclusion. And yes it is the contrast between ancient and modern languages. I got this question wrong too (+_+') \
nzudrak518
Thursday, Nov 11 2021
For 13, B is supported by passage A that markets help people share information quickly and accurately. A is more like a common assumption?
For 22, the task is to find a strengthening answer that supports an increase in number of species being associated with an increase in those that need protection. We know that splitters support increasing number of species, and E says that the proponent of the splitter theory are actually pushing for reclassification of species that they know are endangered.
nzudrak518
Saturday, Jun 05 2021
Whoa red is my favorite color! Looking great
nzudrak518
Sunday, Jul 04 2021
I would recommend Speed Reading with the Right Brain by David Butler. Basically this book explains how to use visualization improves comprehension, and with great comprehension comes speed reading.
nzudrak518
Sunday, Jul 04 2021
The stimulus never told about the economic system. Being desirable may be due to other factors other than being economical.
nzudrak518
Friday, Dec 03 2021
@ said:
Could someone please explain why A is wrong? I chose E first and then read the conclusion again and thought that "necessary physical therapy" was some sort of a trap. Please #help. Thanks in advance!
The stimulus talked about major improvement only and it was not a part versus whole kind of flaw.
nzudrak518
Thursday, Jul 01 2021
@ said:
@ said:
Hi @,
Yeah, I agree. The numbers increasing by 10 doesn't mean that they make up the larger percentage of the pie. The percentage may only increase (let's say by 10%) but we are looking for an increase that makes the majority (compared to drop-outs). Therefore, when the answer choice says graduates make a higher percentage of the recruits compared to drop-outs, it weakens the argument that drop-outs constitute the majority.
Reviving this thread: I've seen many comments stating that it's problematic to choose an answer choice involving absolute numbers when approaching a stimulus involving changes in percentages....but why is that the case?
It's because the assumption that an increase/decrease in number is equal to an increase/decrease in percentage is a classic flaw. It has not always been the case.
@ said:
@ The LSAC will know that you cancelled the test. But law schools will not. the LSAC only sends scores that aren't cancelled.
Your law school report will reflect that your score was canceled at your request; this advises law schools that you were exposed to test questions.
https://www.lsac.org/lsat/taking-lsat/lsat-scoring/canceling-scores-without-score-preview-option