#help

Maybe someone can help me explain why B is wrong? If you contrapose the conditional, it makes the A --> B, B, then A flaw.

There are other parallel questions that exploit contraposing the conditional for the correct AC. Why can't we do it here?

In C, cannot determine doesn't imply failing to ensure? How?

Ex: I cannot determine if the pie was made with custard filling. I cannot ensure the pie was made with custard filling

#help (added by Admin)

Tends would definitely be a correlation indicator. You can probably also treat it like a "most" indicator as well

#help

What does no sizeable subgroup in E mean? I was thinking E meant ( M --> !C) does not exist, so the only group that does exist is M --> C (negating a conditional), which would make it the same as A (M always cures).

When you confuse necessary for sufficient, you are always assuming a conditional possibility does not exist (subgroup). Why exactly is E wrong?

IMO #25 is an unfair question. It's the discovery of the black swan that disproves the white swan theory. But the discovery of Mercury, nor that of any planet, didn't disprove Newton's laws.

If anything, it was the discovery of Einstein's laws being a better model than Newton's for Mercury's orbit that functions as the black swan, not a planet itself.

cheeky little question

#help

Q27 E:

What's the difference between "requires" and "lead to"? I thought they were the same.

Because of that, I felt the last sentence was verbatim in answer choice E.

This Q stem was evil for a variety of ways. It combines wording we see from 3 different question types: NA, SA, and PSA

This question tests the concept of expected value, which makes D wrong. The argument already considers the expected value, so mentioning chance of winning does nothing to the argument

Like others, I got this question right but felt that E was lacking as an AC.

Even if E is true, it still allows the conclusion to be possible: Some celestial objects that are not planets or stars could could indeed be generating light. This sentence is compatible with E

#help

I got hung up on D since "testimony" seemed like an inappropriate way to describe signed petitions

I would only do so when missing around the amount required for your goal score on individual sections

#help

I thought Edward doesn't think taxation counts as forcing, as long as emigration is allowed? Like Edward would think the government isn't forcing taxation, since people can always choose to leave (i.e. they have an option to not get taxed)

Another flaw in the argument is that the argument fails to address the possibility that actions could be altruistic without appearing to be altruistic

I feel this question doesn't hold up to modern LSAT standards. A assumes that you can't solve a problem in a malicious manner

#help

Why is the gap between "wants" and "will" not a problem in B? The same verb "support" is duplicated in the conclusion for the stimulus, but not for B.

Moreover, the lack of "all" as a quantifier is meaningless. "All swans are white" is the same as "swans are white". I am struggling to not see a contradiction between miller supporting (all) proposals to increase school funding and potentially not supporting one that gathers money via increased property taxes.

IMO the connection between coloration and saving then discarding teeth is ??????

Which practice test?

@ I would say it depends where you are in your LSAT journey. If you're in the beginning, I would say to just finish some parts of the CC, then drill sections. Then find your weaknesses (if any) and finishing the drills in the CC

If you've already studied for a while, you should probably only do the parts of the CC you have trouble in.

I would only do PTs when I have hit a comfortable score on the individual sections. For example, if I'm aiming for a 170 (-7 to -10), I would only begin doing PTs when I can expect to miss -7 to -10 (or less) on a RC+LG+LR section

IMO C does explain...

With less leaves in the winter, more light falls into parts of DF. Naturally, snakes would be able to see lemurs better with more light.

Conversely, the less nocturnal activity in RF is also explained by there being more cover.

#help

#help Why is C right in #5? I believe this is a necessary/sufficient confusion

IMO this was too hard for a Q1

#help

Q22.

Why can't words like "troublesome", "elegant but speculative", "claim to found such evidence", "circumstantial evidence", and "they claim" be used to denote a dismay at lack of rigor?

that moment when #25 looks like a RecS but is actually an infer

gambler's fallacy. I feel its so rare for this flaw to be tested