13/14 but my timing was HORRIBLE!!!!! If anyone has any time saving tips (besides more practice) please help a girl out :(

@Susie I think you are focusing too much on what EM's quote "means". The question is asking why the author included the quote, not what the quote is saying (purpose > implied meaning). The entire last paragraph and the sentences leading up to the quote are describing "the writing he cares about" (he being EM). The author then includes that quote at the end to explain the writing EM cares about even more, or as answer choice C states: "further elaborate the kind of writing Mphahlele values."

Feeling okay about my score but terrible about my timing :(

@LauraBolivar I know this is a late reply but for me I find it easier to spot an incorrect answer than a correct one. The LSAT writers love to make the correct answer choice sound extremely mediocre while making incorrect answer choices sound appealing. Ellen Cassidys book "The Loophole" has a helpful chapter on "red flag" answer choices and with practice it has really helped me to eliminate answers that "seem correct" but are too strong, out of scope, etc.

@bbcream I think you are focusing too much on disproving hypothesis 2. The point of the question is to strengthen the view that LHB was limited to Earth and the Moon. If LHB occurred 4 billion years ago and it was limited to the earth and the moon then we would not see evidence of LHB on any other planets. Answer choice A is simply stating that there is very little (essentially zero) evidence LHB happened on mars (which strengthens the view that it was limited to the earth and moon by eliminating an alternate explanation). The "declining" bombardment mentioned in hypothesis 2 is irrelevant because the question isn't asking us to weaken hypothesis 2, it is asking us to strengthen hypothesis 3.

The question is not asking you to find "what the whole passage is trying to answer" it is just asking you to find which question COULD be answered. That is why the answer to A is the only one talked about in the passage (it is the only one that CAN be answered).

@JoshuaTWilkins I would not necessarily say that you “got lucky” because your line of reasoning is still correct (winning awards does not technically equal superior designs), but the bigger issue with answer choice C is that it some ≠ most. They are both assumptions that the author makes, but the first, (winning awards = superior designs) is a lot more reasonable of an assumption for the author to make than the second (some design awards = most of their designs are superior). For example if answer choice C said “At least ONE design produced by a small company is superior to the designs produced by Baxe” that would be reasonable because several design companies winning awards for their design work reasonably implies that at least one of their designs are superior, it does not imply that MOST are superior. (recall most means majority).

Why did I even bother trying to diagram this FML

For anyone confused by the word "solely" in answer choice A, think about the conclusion simply as "This shows their motive was X". The goal of a sufficient assumption is to GUARANTEE the conclusion and in order to guarantee "their motive was X" we must eliminate all other potential motives and show that this is the SOLE motive.

@KayceBassman Unfortunately this is exactly how the LSAT writers want us to feel and they purposely make the questions come down to two seemingly similar answer choices. Ellen Cassidy has a decent chapter about answer choices in her book "The Loophole", that you might find helpful! She specifically mentions how to choose between two answers choices.

@hhernan20228 I think the only person who could answer this question would be you. If you are taking practice tests and consistently getting high 160's then I would say the chances of you getting at least a 160 are good. A 148 means that about 68% of test writers did better than you. A 165+ would mean that only about 14% of people did better than you. It is a huge jump to make (and it can definitely be done) but everybody learns differently so it is really up to you how long it takes!

@JackClemons85 You are correct that the test subjects being of similar age, weight, and health strengthens the idea that SOMETHING is causing the throat abnormalities. However, this is no way means that snoring is that cause. It could just as easily be a different cause like smoking or certain foods. Answer choice C actually weakens the argument by showing that alternative hypotheses are possible. The stimulus says, "snoring causes damage." We can strengthen this by eliminating the alternate hypothesis "damage causes snoring" (as seen in answer choice E).

@AkshayaAnnampedu I think you are reading too much into it. "Helping authorities detect" literally means the citizens are helping detect tornadoes. It does not say "attempting to help" or "attempt to detect" or anything that would suggest the help isn't working. The world "help" inherently means to assist or make something easier. If "many more citizens" are assisting in the detection of tornadoes, it is reasonable to assume that more tornadoes are being recorded.

@ChrisBos I think you are confusing sufficient and necessary. A self-sustaining population REQUIRES a larger habitat (SS -> LH) or contra (/LH -> /SS). Increasing the habitat alone is not enough to guarantee a self-sustaining panther population (as you noted with your 1 square foot example). Whereas the existence of a self-sustaining panther population IS ENOUGH to guarantee that the habitat increased in size. "Larger habitat" is never on the left side of the conditional arrow, therefore larger habitat does not trigger any necessary conditions (because it is a necessary condition itself). All we know is what happens if the population is self-sustaining (SS) and what happens if the habitat is NOT larger (/LH).

@KateLevinson You are correct that it is reasonable to assume "some small companies have designs superior to Baxe" because "some" meaning "at least one" is easy to prove in this case. However, answer choice C says "for the most part" which implies that "most" small companies have better designs. We cannot make conclusions on "most" small companies because the stimulus only mentions "several." If you go back to the Foundations lessons, specifically Logic of Intersecting Sets Quantifier Inferences, there is a lesson about how all implies most and most implies some (All -> Most -> Some), but you cannot reverse the direction of the arrows (you cannot imply most from some).

@Jcruzmed Haha no worries! I only learned about it recently from someone else's comment

@Jcruzmed At the top left corner of the screen (under where it says "Lesson 4 - Handel's da capo Arias") there should be a "show question" option

@AlexHaro "Conclusion drawn by the argument as a whole" just means the main conclusion. For each LSAT question type there are multiple ways to word the same question stem. For example, this main conclusion question also could have been worded as "...most accurately expresses the overall conclusion drawn in the argument." or "most accurately expresses the main point." Either way it is always asking for the same thing, you just have to memorize/understand the question stem variations!

@nelleluvsyou The list of sufficient indicators that he provided for group 1 are not exhaustive. "Whenever" is a very common sufficient indicator. If it helps you can think about the few indicators he did provide as follows: when(ever), where(ever), any(time), every(time). I would recommend googling a more extensive list of indicators to see all of the variety because it can get confusing.

@ArmaniHunter05 I think what it is saying is that the African American folk tradition does not see "good and evil" as black and white. They recognize that the two concepts can overlap and have nuances.

@ProtatoChip It is a conclusion because it is supported by another claim. Any time you have evidence for why something is true, it is a type of conclusion. Ask yourself "how do I know this is true?", for question 1 that would look like "how do I know that the author has decided to go ahead with the operation?" and the answer would be "because with their current medical condition their is no other alternative." In contrast if you were to ask "how do I know that there is no other alternative?", you would not have an answer because that claim is a premise so it is a statement of fact and it is not supported by anything else. Alternatively try rewording the argument so the premise comes first "With my current medical condition, there may not be another alternative. Therefore, I have decided to go ahead with the operation, despite the health risks."

@sapalmeri For question 4, I think you were confused by the commas. I would recommend reading "The Loophole" by Ellen Cassidy (specifically her lesson on commas and middle-out theory). For question 5 , the word "consequently" is a very common conclusion indicator (you can also think of it as saying "as a result"), I would recommend memorizing the indicators.

@Bicakum03 It might help if you think of premises as "facts" or "evidence" that support a main claim (the conclusion). In question 1 it is essentially just a list of facts (no main conclusion). On the LSAT, a stimulus like this with no conclusion is common for inference questions.