LOL I thought the MP was that imported programs are not detrimental to developing countries but it made sense after kevin explained the MP

@Kevin_Lin makes perfect sense! Thank you!!

@Kevin_Lin Thank you for your response! I meant within the actual text/passage. How do we know what's the author's perspective versus others? Are there indicators or clues that we can use to tell what is the opinion of the author versus the opinions of others?

How do you know that the author is the one talking about "lends credence to Ginsburg's position"?

@Kevin_Lin How are we aware which author/perspective the question was talking about? I was answering this question from the author's perspective, not the opponents , before watching the explanation. When there are multiple perspectives- how do we know which one to focus on?

took me 5 darn minutes but somehow i got it lol

i feel like a dumb dumb for getting this wrong. My brain is getting jumbled with all these different question types

idk but these explanations have not been good at all. I feel like there were longer explanations for much more simpler questions.

I believe these questions are rare because they are not as difficult as all the other question types we've done so far--LSAT writers want us to struggle lol

I got this right but I am confused in the explanation how one rule is about how access is justified while the other rule is access it not justified #help

@Lidiia definitely a bug. Sometimes when you reload it doesn't capture the time spent correctly. IK questions I spent a solid 2 minutes on and it said I spend 30 seconds lol

POE has been my friend every time lol cux half these answer choices don't make sense lol

@JessM really like this person's explanation so just going to paste it here:

C is wrong because it doesn’t matter if they consume the same amount of fat as people who did not decrease red meat. If you think about it, if both groups consume the same amount of “other fat” then one group consumes less fat through red meat, they will actually have a total lower amount of fat consumed.

For example:

Group 1: 50g fat + 10g fat (red meat) = 60g

Group 2: 50g fat + 0g fat (red meat) = 50g

So this doesn’t explain why group 2 would have more but instead would support the first part. Therefore, answer C doesn’t explain why group 2 would actually have more fat consumed.

dude i need to stop second guessing i was between B and E

@JessM you can click on the show question button next to the comments button to show the full question and try to give it a go from there!

I also eliminated E because it almost seemed to general of a claim to make from the statements in the stimulus

bruh my dumbahh had C and then i changed it to trap answer B :(

@ps939 Thank you for these! I have completed these but appreciate you putting more!

@KeziaH19 don't think the point here is to take notes--rather it is to practice. At the end of the section there is a review MC and that goes over all the things we practiced.I would utilize that for note taking. I am also building a notebook of all the You Trys where I explain why each answer choice is wrong/right, so I can refer to it to see common traps when I get to harder MC questions.

#help I am so confused how this would apply to a real LSAT question... would love an example of some sort

the fact that this entire unit has zero videos is really pissing me off. I paid for a course with videos and instruction, not examples I could ask AI to do for me for free lol.

#feedback

@mibuch I am literally wondering the same thing. Like all these tips and when it comes to drilling im so lost lol

i wish they would start implementing actual LSAT questions so we can see the technique applied. All these techniques and I am so confused when the time comes to apply them to legitimate LSAT questions

would've been helpful to see the examples translated into Lawgic

interested