Hi,

Asking because there are 2 preptest questions that really confuse me regarding this phrase.

In PT80.S2.Q18, the correct answer is B, and the reason why people say that the answer here is not A is because passage A does not have "particular examples". Passage A discusses hypothetical examples (ie line 11-- "if you analyze a stock, decide it is overvalued..." and line 24--"someone selling a stock because..."). People say that these are not particular examples because they don't refer to a single real-life instance.

However, in PT25.S1.Q3, the correct answer is A, even though one of the two "specific examples" used in the passage is a hypothetical on line 15-- "does a government office, for example, have the right..." (the other "specific example" seems pretty specific-- line 32-- "recently, two employees of an automobile company...")

Unless "specific example" means something different from "particular example", I am really not sure how to resolve the paradox between these 2 questions' answer explanations.

Can anyone please explain this?

Thanks!

Best regards

Hi,

So I am just really lost on why the right answer here was B instead of A. Can anyone explain why B is right and A is wrong?

When looking at the question, I focused primarily on the last two sentences of passage A (kinda treated those last two sentences as a LR question).

As a result, A looked like it weakened the argument passage A gives in these last two sentences because it created a reason for the phenomena (of rich people usually paying about the same under progressive tax as they would under flat tax) to be surprising (and thus less "unsurprising").

In addition, I just didn't see how B weakens the idea that this phenomena was "unsurprising", and as a result, I thought B was incorrect.

#HELP

Thanks!

Hi,

The answer here was B, but I chose D. Can anyone help explain to me why B is right and D is wrong? For context:

Here was my reasoning for why I thought D was right:

I thought that passage A would agree-- on line 13, he describes an argument that explains that progressive taxes make rich pay more, he never disputes that fact, and later on in the last paragraph, he even implies that progressive makes rich pay more by talking about how progressive gives rich more incentives to try to cheat the system than flat tax would.

In addition, I thought passage B would disagree-- on line 34, he says that progressive treats all taxpayers equally.

Here was my reasoning for why I thought B was wrong:

I knew for sure that passage B would agree on this issue (line 56). However, I wasn't sure if passage A would agree or disagree since in the last paragraph of passage A, it seems that passage A is saying that MOST rich people in flat tax systems (line 27-- denoted by the word "usually") pay the same as people in progressive tax systems. In addition, the fact that rich people in flat tax systems, without any apparent tax dodging, pay about the same as progressively taxed rich people, shows that they would normally pay less had the progressively taxed rich people had not dodged. Thus, this COULD mean that SOME rich people in progressive tax systems still pay more than rich people in flat tax systems, making passage A a bit ambiguous on this issue.

#Help

Thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-1-passage-4-questions/

Hi,

So the correct answer here was B. According to JY, B is right because the argument requires an assumption: that in order for direct mail advertising to not be bad for the environment, it needs to replace those who would normally buy something through car rather than getting new people to buy stuff. However, I didn't see this argument flaw because I didn't know how we could assume that direct mail advertising was bad for the environment at all-- after all, the stimulus only tells us why normal shopping is bad, and doesn't tell us that direct-mail advertising creates paper waste or anything like that. Creating paper waste or any negative effect of direct mail advertising in real life seems to be a scientific fact, and I thought that LSAT doesn't want us to create assumptions regarding scientific facts. As a result, the argument actually looked pretty sound to me, and none of the answer choices looked any good to me.

Can anyone explain to me how we are able to assume that direct-mail advertising is worse than not buying at all when the stimulus never seems to tell us that (thus making B correct)?

Thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-2-question-25/

Hi,

The correct answer here was E. I understand why the answer is E (because it shows an alternative explanation for the phenomena described in the stimulus), but I have trouble understanding why D is wrong. After all, if following the protocol actually works in curing infection, then doesn't that weaken the argument by showing how maybe it isn't the protocol that is counterproductive, but possibly something else that is causing the higher infection rates?

#Help

Thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-3-question-22/

Hi,

I was really stuck between D and E because they both seemed textually correct (E is the correct answer). I thought D was textually correct because the passage really did seem to state that the front-back explanation was consistent with physicists' traditional explanations (since physicists have a "traditional desire" to separate the observer from the phenomenon, and question 25's correct answer C seems to confirm that a "traditional desire" translates into a "tendency" to give explanations like the front-back explanation). Can anyone explain why D is wrong?

thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-71-section-4-passage-4-questions/

Hi,

So the correct answer here was E. I can see why all the wrong answers are wrong, but I had a really hard time accepting that E is right because I saw "doctors" here as referring to ALL doctors (and I don't think we know anything about all doctors from this stimulus). I made this inference because from past experience in other LSAT preptests, in the absence of quantifying language like some/most, I thought that we construe it to refer to ALL (ie PT70.S4.Q18, where E is correct because "managers" refers to ALL managers).

#Help

Thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-71-section-3-question-23/

Hi,

I think this question is infamously hard... can anyone explain why the answer is D and not C? Both C and D looked incredibly attractive :(

P.S. I have read a lot of explanations for this question, and the top 2 I have seen (but don't feel fully address why D is right and C is wrong) are:

explanation #1-- D is the only correctly qualified answer choice: D is the only one that talks about "viewers" and all the other answer choices talk about other groups of people that may not include the surveyed viewers.

My problem with explanation #1: D talks about "viewers surveyed immediately prior to the debate", while the stimulus talks about "viewers surveyed immediately after the debate". These 2 groups may or may not intersect. In addition C talks people who people who watched the televised debate, which also may or may not intersect with the "viewers surveyed immediately after the debate" described in the stimulus. Thus, both C and D may or may not qualified correctly.

explanation #2-- it is totally possible for us to take the information in C and not weaken the stimulus at all. After all, let's say that the people who watched the debate were 5% more likely to vote for Tanner than those who did not watch. It is still possible for the viewers surveyed among the people who watched the debate to be biased for Lopez.

My problem with explanation #2: a flaw also exist with D-- that the viewers surveyed immediately prior to the debate are not the same people surveyed after the debate. This could mean that D could be true without weakening the argument too. In this respect, I feel like it is still quite difficult to balance between the 2 answer choices when both seem flawed, and it is hard to tell which one is less flawed.

Thanks!

Best regards

Hi,

I know for some people this question may have been easy, but I was really stumped between B and E because of the last sentence in the stimulus. I saw the last sentence as saying that the trait that determined why the trees had different lifespans was attributed to the trees rather than the species. As a result, I chose B.

I am kind of starting to see why E is right instead of B, but I am still kinda stuck on what exactly I did wrong in interpreting the stimulus. Can anyone explain to me their reasoning about what the last sentence actually meant and why E is right?

thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-70-section-1-question-12/

Hi,

So this question is really hard in my opinion-- I have been looking at this problem for quite a while and I still can't see why A is correct. Can anyone explain why A was correct here?

Thanks!

Best regards

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-39-section-3-passage-3-questions/

Hi,

I chose E, but the answer was A.

Here's supposedly why the answer is A: given that the question is asking for what would "most support the author's claim [on lines 24-27] about the relationship between muralism and the Mexican Revolution", people are treating this question as if the "claim about the relationship" is the statement on 26-27: that the muralists reflected important innovations in the art world (thus leading to the correct answer = answer choice A.

Here's why I chose E: I thought that a relationship had to be a connection between the Mexican Revolution and muralism, so I was focusing on the phrase that muralism was the result of changes that the Mexican Revolution represented (line 24-26). This led me to choose E, since this looked like the only answer choice that could possibly support a claim regarding the relationship between Muralism and Mexican Revolution.

In other words, I didn't agree with A's reasoning because the claim on 26-27 only talks about muralism and doesn't connect it with Mexican Revolution.

Can anybody explain how answer choice A was correct? How were we supposed to know that this claim regarding this relationship was that described on lines 26-27 rather than that described on 24-26?

Any #help would be appreciated!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-39-section-3-passage-1-questions/

Hi,

I was really stuck on this question because both B and D look like they weaken the argument here. Can anyone explain why D does not weaken the argument?

Any #help would be appreciated!

#HELP

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-june-2007-section-3-question-21/