This was great Kevin. Very helpful, thank you.

Kicking it Up to the Domain has helped me a lot in cutting out the noise in these complex conditional stimuli. A very practical effective strategy.

This strategy has been so helpful in better understanding complex argument structures! No other LSAT course that I have taken has provided this approach.

A---->B; B---->A = Mistaken Reversal

If coffee, I will feel energetic, if energetic I will have coffee. No dice. Mistaken Reversal.

If most of A consists of B and all of B consists of C, then B and C are now inseparable and one in the same. So naturally, most of A must be C. I am looking at B and C interchangeably and one in the same.

Is my reasoning correct?

Is it necessary (no pun) to diagram as a subset versus an outright sufficient - necessary arrow for uniformity purposes? To be clear, instead of writing out gC, can I write this out as G---C, similar to how the first premise is written out as C---M?

I find this easier to track.

Slowly...one question at a time. No LSAT study program is going to be perfect. You have to find the one that works for you.

@Rocky I identified "But this is not a sustainable, long-term solution" as a subsidiary conclusion as well since it appears to support the overall conclusion that operations should shut down immediately.

So, if this was a question asking what role this statement plays in the argument and two of the answer choices were premise or subsidiary conclusion, I would choose the latter. Ugh. Tricky.

I just scored a 145 on a practice test and thought I would score much higher. It reminded me of the time I was at a block party, and they had one of those "how hard can you throw a baseball" machines. I wound up and threw the ball so hard that I thought I had to have thrown at least 80mph. It came up as 63mph.

My goal score is a 165. How many months of dedicated studying of 2-4 hours per day with one day off per week will this jump in score take?