I skipped it and I'm glad I did.

I got this wrong, but isn't too bad if you can simplify the stimulus.

Stimulus: If published, its through an agent, requested, or by a renown author.

E. If published, but not through an agent or by request, is by a renown author.

I chose D during the test and B during BR. In the stimulus it says that the poetry transmits the values through non-explicit means, but it is not explicitly said in D that heroic figures/role models embody those values. During the BR, I just couldn't find an error in B. I'm not sure why I eliminated it the first time.

I think this issue can be overcome through careful reading.

@ The GMAT appears to be a more suitable replacement than the GRE..

Assuming they want to differentiate the high scorers, I don't think the GMAT would work. For example, I scored 90+ percentile on the GMAT but scored high 150s on the LSAT. I wouldn't mind a law school accepting my GMAT score in lieu of the LSAT, but that probably wouldn't go over too well with the 170+ crowd.

Still, the comparison is interesting because the GMAT's Critical Reasoning questions are very similar to the LSAT's LR questions, albeit easier.

I think the key here is finding the flaw before checking the answers. I got this wrong timed, but BR'd correctly pretty easily once I understood the stimulus better.

B attacked the biggest weakness (suff/nec flaw) in the argument, but E gave me second thoughts. Mainly because E attacks the assumption in the argument that there is water on Europa, when the data only strongly suggests it is so.

For answer A, the second part just doesn't directly address the stimulus' argument.

This one really frustrates me. The first sentence says professors should be given paid leaves of absence for research purposes, but at no time does it say that leave of absences are necessary for research. Why can't research be done without taking leaves of absence from teaching?

This is why the flaw in David's question doesn't seem like a flaw to me. David is essentially, but not explicitly, asking why professors need leaves of absence to do research when they can do research and teach at the same time.

It is entirely plausible to me that he can acknowledge both of research's two benefits (human knowledge, teaching), but still ask why the teachers need absences to do so. You can improve teaching while teaching! It is not explicitly stated nor common sense that taking time off from teaching will allow someone to improve in teaching.

I'd appreciate if someone could talk me off the ledge before I fall into the LSAT cavern of doom. Thanks :)

The argument gap here is between vitamin C's correlation with "lower heart disease" and the conclusion's "healthier than average" claim. It doesn't consider that someone may have lower risk of heart disease but still be less healthy than average.

Answer D exploits this gap with infectious disease. Vitamin C reduces heart disease, but increases likelihood of infectious disease. This would likely not make a person healthier than average. Argument weakened.

On being old:

Going into school with an assumption that 23 year olds are immature just reinforces the mentality that a divide exists in the first place. I'm 33 and plan to associate with other friendly people, whether 22 or 90 years old. I've worked a lot with younger people professionally, and aside from the occasional but innocent "you're old" joke, its actually quite fun to be around.

On my post undergrad period:

I will include my 10+ years on my resume, and my PS story will originate from those years. I see those years as nothing but a positive on my application.

On aspiring to be a lawyer:

Being a lawyer certainly wasn't an aspiration until a couple years ago and I don't make any apologies about it. My change of direction will be alluded to in my PS. But like David said, I will try to show it instead of saying it explicitly.

Good luck everyone!

"Answer B is immediately irrelevant...which is...if you read it correctly."

Sigh....

I lost my mind in this stimulus. What I should have done is focus on Glen's last sentence, because it is clear that is the conclusion. Sara refers directly to it by saying "but such a role" and disputes it. They disagree about "Law's primary role should be to create virtuous citizens." E is clearly the answer if you see it this way.

B: Prediction of business success isn't really relevant to the relationship between overconfidence and starting a business.

E: Business acumen? Again, that is not really relevant to the relationship between overconfidence and starting a business.

D Took me 2 minutes, but this is really the only option here. It provides evidence that the conclusion is correct.

“help residents of rural areas gain access to electricity.”

This can be assumed to mean:

“help SOME (1-100) residents of rural areas gain access to electricity.”

It cannot be assumed to mean:

“help ALL residents of rural areas gain access to electricity.”

So you can't logically conclude the subsidy has failed, since according to the sentence above, it only needed to provide electricity to at least one more rural resident.

A: Doesn't mean that THIS boulder didn't come from 100+ miles away.

B: The "closest geological source" isn't really relevant. This one boulder doesn't have to have come from the closest source. There could be a million sources of volcanic rock within 100 miles.

C: Same as B.

D: If the glaciers move south, and there is no volcanic rock north, how on earth did it get there? This seriously weakens our argument.

E: The non-existence of other boulders does not impact our argument.

I immediately saw the missed connection between "case-study assignments" and "books" in the stimulus. In the answer, this gap is filled by "print reading material," but I didn't think this filled the gap when I read it initially. I still think the gap between print reading material and books is pretty large.

This is a very thorough explanation. Thanks.

Answer B focuses on the incorrect group of children. The stimulus focuses only on the children who successfully completed the chess program, while B focuses on those that started but not completed the program.

Nope, nope, nope. Abort. Skipping this one...

Some others in the forums have recommended meditation. Personally, I just downloaded a couple apps that people had mentioned and am trying them out now. One is called "Headspace," and the other is "Calm." These are on iOS, so I'm not sure about android. Good luck!

The key to D is remembering "Not All A's are B's" is the same as "A ←s→ /B.

POE works too...

“A great writer does not need any diversity in subject matter”

I had an issue identifying this as negating the whole conditional relationship. I could have identified the "some...not..." form, but not in the way this sentence is structured. Text from a prior lesson below explains the difference. The important part is in bold, and looks very similar to our original sentence:

"Some Jedi do not use the Force.

See how that’s different from “No Jedi use the Force?” That’s how it works for all conditional statements. You can formulate the contradiction (i.e., the negations) by saying “Some [of the sufficient] is not [the necessary].” Or, if grammatically it doesn’t make sense to use “some,” you can fall back on the more general rule of “One can be [the sufficient] and not be [the necessary].” For example, “If the President endorses this bill, then it will pass.” Here, it clearly doesn’t make sense to use “some.” So, we fall back on the more general rule and say “The President can endorse the bill and it could not pass.”"

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/how-to-negate-statements-in-english/

This one was so easy that I thought it was a trick.

Answer C got me. "Written ones" clearly refers to written tradition, but I had lost that idea nugget by the time I read through the whole stimulus.

How often are these circular reasoning questions now? I've done a couple of the 70's now and don't recall seeing one besides this.

Stimulus: Your art can offer someone 10 aesthetic fulfillment points. But people don't need your aesthetic fulfillment points because they can max out on the world's best art (over in France). Just give it up!

E) Your art would be worth 10 aesthetic fulfillment points, but because the Mona Lisa exists, its only worth 5 points. Sorry!