You're making assumptions. Remember, stick to what the stim is talking about. It says it's bound to be unpopular either with the faculty OR the students. It's one or the other, it cannot be both. Work within the rules that the question sets

Damn I might be stupid

I BUILT THIS SENTENCE, ME, BRICK BY BRICK, AND ILL BE DAMNED IF I LET YOU MODIFY IT JUST CAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE THE WAY ANOTHER PREDICATE LEAVES INFORMATION TO BE DESIRED

Imagine after the concession the lsat author just hits us with a "but I know something about you 😈"

Remember, an "argument" is a premise + a conclusion. The premise would disprove the conclusion if the second sentence was the conclusion. The context is simply the set up, just think of it as an imaginary person's opinion, which the author disagrees with, starting with the "yet" and then providing evidence against the imaginary notion/opinion

It seems you're interpreting the text incorrectly. The passage you're referencing actually says "it seems unlikely there would be much left to learn," not "it seems likely." So, the author is disagreeing with the idea that it's unlikely there is more to learn.

However, I think what you're trying to say is that the conclusion should state it's likely there's more to learn, correct? But that wouldn't make sense in the context of the argument. If the conclusion is that there's likely more to be discovered, then how does the discovery of new things in music support that conclusion, especially considering that jazz has already been around for over a century? The argument is attacking the notion that because because jazz has been around so long, it's unlikely there's much left to learn

It's def easier to see it now, but whenever I do PTs or drills I find that I'm having to reread the context because something in it is required to be known to answer the question. Some information about the world in which this question exists. So while it's okay to do on these drills, I wouldn't make it a habit

It does work better in everyday language because most people don't use "for" in this way when speaking, so it just sounds off, but it's grammatically correct to use. "Because" would also work "better," but all 3 of them mean the same thing

ok but what if we kissed ahaha

Yeah that confused me too, I feel like it can be broken down into two premises. There's also questions earlier on the page which can also be broken down. But I guess it's kind of arbitrary

I just realized that's the only one I was using because it's the fastest

#freemrfatcat

cause he's HIM

I'm so brainrotted from internet terminology lmao so the way I think of it is: the more you're reaching like crazy, the weaker your argument. The less reaching, the stronger your argument.

Yeah exactly, but more importantly, why blame the kitty 😕

I agree, even reading this example a few lessons back I could clearly see it started with the conclusion but my brain was like wait is that allowed LOL