For some reason I thought it was an unreasonable assumption that just because they are Indian they are eating Indian curry. I personally don't think that is a huge leap, but I thought the LSAT was attempting to trap me with what they think is too big an assumption.
I wouldn't worry too much about time considering you just started. At this stage you should really focus on drawing all the correct inferences and on accuracy. Time will come with repetition. I believe it was taking me around 15 minutes a game early on as well, and I typically get -0 on logic games now.
It must have taken me about 5 mins during blind review to figure out what the hell was going on. I thought I had mapped out the stimulus perfectly in my head during timed run, but when I got to the AC nothing was matching with my prephrase, as far as I could tell. These LSAC bastards really outdid themselves on this question.
So, during this video JY says that answer choice A is wrong because of the strict standards of a must be true question. I was just wondering if A. would be correct if it was a MSS question. Basically, if I still have to make a bigger assumption than is warranted for a MSS. https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-86-section-4-question-20/
Could answer choice A. be correct for a MSS question? Or is that still too big a leap?
#help (Added by Admin)
I think a huge realization for me was that it really means NECESSARY. So any extraneous information would make that answer choice incorrect. Say for example, that on a given question you know that the conclusion is asking you for the link that all lions have large teeth, an incorrect answer choice might say something like all lions and tigers have large teeth. Based on the extra information about the tigers this answer would be incorrect. Also, there are two main categories of assumption questions: Linking assumptions and defender assumptions. Linking is similar to sufficient assumption questions in that you are trying to link the premise to the argument. The main difference is what I previously highlighted at the beginning about the assumption being only what is necessary. These answers are a bit easier to predict before actually seeing the answers. Defenders just eliminate any outside ideas that may weaken the conclusion. Let's say a hypothetical conclusion read as follows, " Humans only have sex because of their genetically programmed interest in producing offspring." A correct answer choice to this might read along the lines of "Humans do not have sex for pleasure." The reason defender answer choices are a bit more difficult for me is because of the huge scope of possibilities the LSAT writers can draw from. Also, I'm not sure if you've done the core curriculum already, but JY has great explanations and I find the negation technique to be especially helpful.
I only had one LG section, and the one with ultrastores and stores was definitely the real one. I felt pretty good about the LG and logical reasoning section. I feel like the RC is really going to kill me. Didn't feel too great about it.