They can censor who they want given they own this site and comment forum and the subject matter is not appropriate for this space, and as a paying customer I am declaring I am annoyed with seeing a lack of moderation in the comments and someone spreading some questionable website to other people who came here to study, so I directed the team's attention to it, that's all I did.

I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling this way. Good on you for having beliefs, but I recommend you keep your comments relevant to the task at hand and be genuinely helpful to the other people trying their best to get through this course.

If you wanted to argue that the question was logically unsound due to your beliefs, you could've done that, but instead you linked to a random, questionable site that links to another random, questionable site about religion on a standardized test learning course. You couldn't even get the person who already agreed with you on your side. Have a blessed day.

#help #feedback

#help #feedback LOL don't see how this is relevant or helpful on an LSAT learning course forum, could we get some mods in here

you will!! you got this!! <3

this is what I'm gleaming from the lesson, too, that the conclusion is a necessary condition and the answer choice you're looking for is like a missing sufficient condition.

i think there's a reason this question type is referred to as "pseudo" sufficient assumption, i think it requires us to make more assumptions than a regular sufficient assumption question would, but the task is a similar framework.

granted, i haven't gotten to sufficient assumption questions yet but this is my guess. would love to hear if you've reached clarity on your question!

Me from the future to say I finished the core curriculum and have sufficient/necessary down more solid now! I agree that it should be true mastery -> understanding concepts

i tried looking for the answer that strengthens the argument here because i struggled with the other tricks, but that was a trick in itself because "weakens EXCEPT" does not imply that the correct answer is the opposite of weakens (strengthens). it's "not weakens," which could mean an answer that doesn't help any argument in any way, just irrelevant info. getting more adjusted to lsat brain....

i hate when i instinctually pick the right answer then doubt myself and switch to the wrong one omggg this will be a huge area of focus for me during this journey

same, all the technical lawgic stuff in the past few lessons have been confusing me more even though it made sense in the core cirriculum, so i've been trying to solve the past few intuitively by talking it out and it's been working

CLAIM

Understanding concepts -> true mastery

sufficient -> necessary

correct?