There are 2 problems with A.

1) it assumes that POPCORN accounts for all snacks (as @Shanseng Peng pointed out below)

2) Stimulus talks about the absolute # people, while A talks about a ratio of children to adults . By this logic, think of this example:

Stimulus:

School In = 100 tickets, 1k students = MORE TICKETS/MORE STUDENTS

school out = 60 tickets, 0 students = LESS TICKETS/LESS STUDENTS

Answer Choice A:

Hi Ratio of Kids @movies (1:1) = 100 kids, 100 adults, 100 popcorn = MORE POPCORN / LESS KIDS

Lo Ratio of Kids @movies (1:10) = 500 kids, 5000 adults, 10 popcorn. = LESS POPCORN/MORE KIDS

this way they are not parallel.

Think of it this way:

The argument concludes that "...no one should be denied the freedom to choose" which is directed at anyone who tries to block you from associating with people (think the Police anti-gang association rules)

vs answer choice (E) which is directed at the person who has permission (may) choose. Like, in the constitution you have the right to assembly, that right doesn't stop the above anti-gang association law.

So, the correct answer choice (C) blocks others from denying you freedom (what the argument is concluding) and (E) simply giving you a right.

I got this answer right, but only through eliminating the wrong ones, and I have a question about the right answer. What does the LSAT mean as a "large proportion?"

If it means most, then with original numbers in your example:

Correctly Addressed = 98,

CA + dmg = 2,

IA = 97,

then IA97 is < 98 and < 50% (of 197) which means NOT most

And if we make it mean SOME then answer choice A will read Large Proportion = Some = At Least One correctly addressed is damaged. The only way i was able to rule this out is to say

[CA2+ and DMG ] doesn't have to mean that one actually existed that was damaged.

But isn't this a far stretch also? Is this b/c this is an old version of the test, or is there some quasi-quantifiable meaning for "large proportion"? (also "small proportion")?

I'm also taking one in Feb. email me at serge.pustelnik@michaelspinello477.com. Aiming @ 170+

"Feed each other bisquits" ... classic.

I got this one wrong (picked E on timed), but switched to C in Blind Review. During BR, C I was able to justify as being right, but the reason I justified E as being wrong, was due to a phrase in E that reads:

"Nothing can justify the intended outcome..." .

I saw from the video where the "action's actual outcomes" is problematic, however isn't ""Nothing can justify the intended outcome..." also problematic? Shouldn't it read "Nothing can justify the means" instead of intended outcome? (this was my reason for justfying E as wrong)

The reason I am bringing this up, is because in the video you mention that if

"...action's actual outcomes" is changed to:

" ..of the end"

this would be a correct choice. Which means that "intended outcome = means." Am I missing something?

Thanks.

PS. I'm loving all your work JY. Thank you!