Same, but I have an issue with drop down options on the actual prep test.

For the people who choose E, the reason why this is wrong is because its saying "small number of repeat offenders commit majority of crime," So ,.01% to .05% of repeat offenders (needle in haystack) commit the majority of crimes. So a subset of (small percentage) repeat offenders, are commuting a majority of crime 99% of violent crimes? =D Haha, this was my first choice and I noticed the word gymnastics, it is a attractive wrong answer, they masqueraded it with lipstick to make it look good for you. But also reconsider why you think this is right in the first place, lets say it was worded the way you thought it was worded "Repeat offenders commit majority of crime", that still does not weaken the argument, CTX 1.) V.C becoming more serious, Premise 2.) 17% more calls for V.C and Conclusion: The average citizen more likely to be a victim of V.C. The argument and assumption is that CRIME has gone up and your likely to become a victim. AC - E Just strengthens the argument if anything, if repeat of offenders commit majority of violent crimes, THEN THIS WOULD STRENGTHEN the argument not weaken. We are asked to weaken, so AC - C as a result of the towns community outreach programs, more people than ever report violent crimes to authorities. This weakens the argument we are failing to consider that perhaps violent crimes weren't reported last year, and they are being properly reported now, thats why it's gone from 0 to 17%, thats why it weakens the context that violent crime is a serious problem, and conclusion your not more than like to be a victim of violent crime no more now than you where last year, the odds are the same.

I got the right answer however I don't know if logically I broke things down correctly. My reasoning was this. In all of these harder questions, each point the author makes are different comparative points that are falsely equated. So the relationship is just the subject, but the point goes in different directions. So first we have the first paragraph. "Some people claim that every human discovery or invention is an instance of self-expression" to me this is more of the context, the first point being made. Second, "But what they seem to ignore is that, trivially, anything we do is self-expressive", the authors pivots on the first point being made, If you say "So in GENERAL, Anything we do is self-expressive" like literally, the fact that we are breathing air right now can be considered self expressive. Last, "So until they can give us a more interesting interpretation of their claim" irrelevant gargon just take note its there, "We are not obliged to take their claim seriously", So the conclusion stands "we need to filter your nonsensical claims that everything is self-expressive HIPPY BS, and just speak to me in plain English, what claim can we address. , Yes the key points is you say "everything created or invented is self-expression (YOUR REACHING), however lets filter out your HIPPY BS because trivially a monkey doing a backflip is self-expression, so unless you can filter your crap out we can't take your claim seriously. = AC C

The squirrel in my backyard has like 30 hazelnuts stored in its mouth for the winter. =D On a serious note, I was pleasantly surprised to get 4/5 correct on this set, but I got all 3 Strengthen Except questions correct. For 2 of them including this one, what made me have a change in Logic is 1.) It doesn't have to weaken 100% the right answer usually looks like a it weakens .009% of the time and you have to "read between the lines so to say". AC-E changes the context for stimuli completely because the stimuli is about comparing 2 different things "Politics vs Personal Finances" and E suggests, its not 2 things, its 3 things we should be concerned about. But I was tempted for C, the test makers serve it on the plate for you clear as day hoping you fall for the trap, Even though the Conclusion clearly makes it wrong, IF you are thinking, dammed if you do, dammed if you don't, its wrong. And the right answer usually is unappealing.

I got 2/7, with this one being one of the ones I got right on blind review. After considering AC for second time, I changed C to E because it gives a competing alternative hypothesis, I don't even know if that applies in this case. Also was considering AC A, but we aren't even talking about female cats, AC B doesn't help us weaken, just says we don't know, its unknown?

I have understood 90% of the questions, to match that of JY's explanation. However, its the answer choices that have gotten me, they put a masqueraded"strongly implied" next to a tempting trap "merely suggests". So don't feel bad if you don't understand, thats only solving half of the problem with LSAT complexity, seriously last 3 tests ive gotten 1/5 to 0/0.

I reallly really misunderstood the assignment on this one. In other conclusions question types we are asked to paraphrase the conclusion (usually a hard task) but this is a most strongly supported conclusion question, which requires a different approach, (premises in passage and answer choices is the conclusion). Lesson learned, I need to be humbled because I've been doing pretty good on conclusion questions types, but this one was good because I haven't seen one of these in a while.

This is the second one I got wrong, I recognize the error of my ways on this one, Most= Majority and I incorrectly chose D. C is right because Not All= Some, so the question says "Some are not equally susceptible to lathyrism". I feel like im making great progress. I definitely learn something, i didn't catch before when I make mistakes.

I got 3/5 on this one. I picked B first which was my first answer, then I went back, because this was the hardest one for me, and changed the answer to E. I feel for the trap, I thought is helped explain something that didn't have to be explained, because we don't know, It's wrong because it WE just don't know if it has lower minerals, what if it has the same amount of minerals, but this does not answer anything in the questions. Next time I'm going to stick to my first answer which makes more sense. =D

Please LORD Bless me with these easy questions on official LSAT =D

This is probably the hardest one I've had to answer thus far, and the thing is I've seen this question before, I got it right but by accident this time. I didn't trust myself at first at finding the conclusion(I had it right the first time), because I stressed myself out just like the first time I read it. What helped me get the answer right is by mistakenly confusing the context as conclusion (I know rookie mistake) but if it makes things better, the conclusion here is extracting information from the context anyways (theory). So by process of elimination, the only answer that mentions theory (plausible & mysterious) and makes sense. By no means am I trying to justify making this rookie mistake, but remember to trust your cues (this was a context switch) Good luck everyone, have an awesome weekend.