Question of citizenship not yet resolved =because of this=> emigration sentiment was a central issue. Both issues were critical topics.

Subsequently, some AA leaders insisted on citizenship & some called for emigration.

Surely, there is a compelling argument for (D) :'(

>a BELIEF is FALSE

Come on, don't do us like this

What are you doing looking at the discussion section of this question?

Get back to studying!

@KMK Map it real quick like "20A <s> Gr -> Orig

and Gr -> Infl"

note: i still got it wrong, wrongly answering that some 20thA might not be Gr & Orig (E) b/c my map forgot the '<s>' between Original & Influencial

12/12 and it only took me 90 minutes to read 8 paragraphs >:)

Nearly convinced myself that the 'two million years' date in 'a group of animal fossils, hominid fossils, and stone tools that were almost two million years old' referred only to the stone tools, due to the grammar of the list.

>:(

@ionicinstinct Disconnect your bias from the test - its just a game to determine correct solutions to comprehension checks. Beyond that, once you ace the test you may have the obligation to defend some people who you probably think are guilty, so this disconnection will serve you well in your career too!

@AutonomousTacticalTheory Deep lore: Agamemnon won the war (in part due to the sacrifice) but then got assassinated by his wife (partially on account of the sacrifice).

This parable teaches us a lot about the LSAT....

Dang, #4 got me

#5 C looks pretty good, even after hearing why it's wrong :'(

Great explanation but E still looks pretty good.

(P): A student uses chatGPT to answer practice LSATs and got a good score. Therefore, when he takes the LSAT, he will also get a good score.

Find the major flaw in the philosophers reasoning:

Explicit purpose: Request help about improving timing

Implicit purpose: Flex a great score

Watch the clock hehehhe, I have no doubt you'll be fine on the exam!

@HilarySackor It doesn't weaken the analogy. It somewhat weakens the argument. The prompt doesn't ask us to weaken the analogy - just the argument.

'Other cities [with much larger economies and populations] experienced large returns, so can we reliably conclude that our city is also likely to experience a big payoff?' Maybe less so, because answer B is what tells us that our city has small pop & econ.

(but even then, it's not a very good 'weakening' argument imho..)

@meepmeep - read the claim/hypothesis - 'Alzheimer's caused by microglia - the brain's own immune cells'. Then, which answers support that claim?

A: irrelevant to claim, weakens it actually

B: effective treatment X reduces immune cells in brain [good]

C: explains process of disease, doesn't weaken or strengthen

D: explains process of disease, doesn't strengthen or weaken

E: irrelevant to claim, just uses the word 'immune' to bait clicks

in summary: look at the claim first - which answers actually STRENGTHEN the claim? only one really does. You don't need to think about any of the biological aspects, those are speedbumps designed to bait you into projecting assumptions onto the question

It's a good thing that the real LSAT isn't timed, or my strategy to get this question right wouldn't work...

I see many people now confused why it isn't C

Carefully read the question stem - which provides a basis for REJECTING (not supporting) the claim?

@PaulinaBaczkowski (D) is true but its a premise in support of a conclusion. In 20 years, it will be impossible for airports to accom enough normal-sized planes -> additional space in new larger planes will likely be used for more passenger seating (B)

Hmm, i understand and have no questions but feel that: if one tries this on the exam, then one will use lots time. if one uses a lot of time, then one will fail the test.

TT > UT

UT > FT

TT > UT > FT