I know this is a little late, but for me I think, "What was the general principle at the beginning?" The only thing that you can say is a general principle from the first paragraph is "A fake can be defined as an artwork intended to deceive" However, the last paragraph doesn't talk about intent to deceive, it talks about how something is fake in that culture if it doesn't serve the same function, it doesn't state that a replica had to be made with the intent to deceive to be fake, it just had to be missing the peg, removing its functional purpose, to be a fake. Therefore it can't tie back to the general principle of "intent to deceive".

What would you think about using the highlighting tool for marking the breaks in really large paragraphs? That way it is more visually distinctive and it's much quicker to go back and find your place. I hear that the tool can be a little clunky and that it might sacrifice too much time to try and use it. What are your thoughts?

I really appreciate that you take the time to help us find out how to answer questions without even knowing the definitions. Sometimes I feel like in the LR core curriculum it was assumed that everyone knew the most random words and so there wasn't even an explanation.

So it sounds like we're not expected to write this out. Is it ever worth writing out formal logic chains? Or is it too much of a time-sink to ever do that? Should I even really need to use scratch paper on the test?

Since A2 is so subjective couldn't it be right in almost any circumstance? Like how would I as a reader, uneducated on the subject, know if there is or is not a better hypothesis unless the premise specifically states that? #feedback

I feel like the LSAT writers always try to turn people away by throwing a crazy vocabulary word (like cogent) in the correct answer choice. I may be wrong but I feel like every time there is only one answer choice with a out of nowhere vocab word, 9/10 times that is the correct answer, especially if everything up until that word was making sense. They want you to see that word and skip it because you think "I don't know that word, therefore the answer doesn't make sense"

Is it just me or does it feel like there should be a more concise way to explain this? Granted it took me about 3 minutes to get the right answer but I feel like the explanation just overcomplicates the analysis, especially when there's a time constraint involved #feedback

Prescriptive describes a rule - "One must do A or B"

Descriptive describes a relationship - "if A then B"

In this example the Prescriptive phrase is -

"any member of the city council ought either to vote against the bill or to abstain"

The Descriptive phrase is -

"if all the members abstain, [then] the matter will be decided by the city's voters."

I know this is a brief explanation but I try to avoid being too wordy. Let me know if this helps or you have any more questions.

"I FEEL LIKE A KING! THE SUNS EYES BURN WHEN IT LOOKS UPON ME. THE OCEAN IS TERRIFIED OF THE DEPTHS OF MY WISDOM. THE NIGHT TURNS TO DAY AS IT RUNS AWAY IN FEAR." -me who got the last 5 questions wrong except this one

For me D is wrong because I believe that we can assume that the author knows the amount of visitors there are coming to the parks. He already knows that that group is smaller than the telecom group. The arguments conclusion doesn't state that this would benefit a greater number of consumers, it just states that it would benefit the visitors. It doesn't matter if the amount of visitors are large or small as long as it is benefiting them. Therefore, D can't be the right answer because we don't care about the size of the group, we just care about if it is benefiting the group.

I totally agree. I actually gave up on watching the videos because they felt so long and drawn out. I feel like what has helped me is reading the content below the videos. I feel like this helps me move through lessons much faster and keep my mind active because I can skip the stuff that I feel like I understand and then it doesn't feel overwhelming if I have to come back and review because that'll just take a minute of skimming the reading portion.