Getting there. I started out at 149. After 2.5 months I'm at 158. Planning to take the LSAT in August and hoping to test at 165 before then. Let's do it. 😌

I had the right answer, and I talked myself out of it. sigh

I was able to narrow it down to A and D. I think I was confusing familial environment with genes. In the end, I was able to parse out A as the correct answer, but I took double the time I was supposed to target. Tricky...🫤

Same! I feel much better prepared for these moving forwards

I liked this question. Your explanations of the incorrect answers was really helpful here.

Prior to your explanations of how to attack "weakens" question, I was horrible at them. I'm much better now. This explanation was better by the way. Showing how to determine the weaken answer, and THEN showing relation/conversion to RRE flowed better. (IMO)

I understand why it was done this way, but I have to say it adds a deep level of confusion to keep restructuring the question into different types. It does help to deepen our understanding of the differences between question types, but having that be the very beginning of the video generates needless confusion. It might be better to save that restructuring for the end of the video, to be used for comparison sake, once everyone understands what the correct answer is, and why.

B. Jocko only barks when he gets a significant number of bananas. That is a reasonable alternative explanation for why he barked on Day 1, and didn't bark on Day 2.

Another one I managed to determine the correct answer but pretty sure it took me 3 times the suggested time allotment. Oy...

RRE is the hardest question type for me thus far. I managed to quick view this one and get it right, but I really had to slow down, read, and think things through. I won't have the luxury of this time during the exam, so I'll have to figure out whether it makes more sense to try to parse out the answer, or skip and come back...

ACCURATE. 👀

Yeah, I am not good at these RRE questions. Maybe I'm too stuck in support spectrum mentality. That makes it difficult to go through POE because I think I'm ruling answers out for the wrong reasons. It means I'm going through the list of answers looking at each one as a possible explanation rather than accepting as true and determining how they help explain the stimulus...🫤

I had my setup on scrap done correctly, with both most arrows and everything, just got turned around trying to figure out rules and contrapositives so I came to the wrong conclusion. If the setup is right, at least I'm halfway there!

This was actually a really helpful way of explaining the situation. Thanks!

Definitely had the WHO THE FUCK IS PAT reaction. 😒😂

Got it 😊

I was able to POE down to B and C. I ended up choosing B (i see now why it's wrong, I'm just going to keep falling for that trick), but the reason I opted not to go for C, was because I over-thought it, I guess. I figured it's not really necessary for them to obtain a larger habitat, what if they just obtain an additional, or secondary habitat. Couldn't that yield the same result? As such, I saw C as strongly supported, but not necessarily MBT. Tricky...

Got it incorrect trying to hurry and reach the suggested time. But when I went back for blind review, I got it correct. More suggestive that I understand how to get to the right answer, I just take too long. Because of course.

I was able to Quick View and get the right answer, but i feel like it took me longer than I'd like to think it through. I'm glad at this point to be moving in the right direction though!

Looking for extremes is one of the things I do. If an answer says something ALWAYS happens, or NEVER happens, that's a red flag. If an answer talks about something that wasn't even mentioned in the stimulus, another red flag. Watching the explanations for each of the questions is helpful as well. I think these question types are difficult because of the spectrum. It just gets better with practice.

5/5. I used to be terrible at MSS, recognizing the fallacies in each response helps to rule out improper responses in process of elimination.

I have been, and Im wondering the same thing. After reading the stimulus I was able to draft what I expected the potential answer to be, and then hunt for it. I was correct, but I watch the videos anyway because I like how it's pointed out how the other answers are wrong. That's something I need to work on for those questions that aren't as straightforward and require process of elimination. If you get no value from watching, then maybe not?

Not kill all the pandas! 😭

This one was interesting. The explanation on induction logic made perfect sense to me as that is how I understood the stimulus as I read it, and as such speculated that answer A was indeed the conclusion. The wrong answer reasoning is that the author accepts it to be true automatically and then provides an example which is not justification for her belief. But i find it hard to wrap my head around this. If someone makes a statement (ie a rule), and I ask them to convince me that the rule is true, would not their best chance of doing that be to provide examples (ie evidence)? I interpreted the piano example as support for the conclusion statement of how musical instruments are classified. Im glad to have watched this lesson however, so I know how to apply this rule moving forward.

Thus far, Main Conclusion questions seem to the most straightforward for me. Using the foundations lessons (indicators, parsing our arguments), I've been able to consistently get right answers. I'm paying close attention to why answers are wrong however, so that when I do come across questions that have 2 answers I feel are potentially correct, I can break them down such that the incorrect one makes itself known. So even tho I'm getting these practice questions correct, im still going through the lesson and explanation.