I feel like E absolutely engages with the premise in that it precludes an alternative hypothesis of what the warranty signals. Your alternative hypothesis were that people do not return the pans because they are lazy or because the process is difficult. An alternative hypothesis that I came up with is that people do not return the pans because the warranty only covers uber specific damages such as your pan breaking in half, and E would preclude that hypothesis.

I see that A is better because it precludes that hypothesis, as well as all others, but I definitely feel like in the framework that was laid out, E engages with the premise on some level.

Anyone else go 0/3 on the last 3 MBT questions? Just really ramped up the difficulty

You read my mind JY.

Was looking for an answer that said "as you get more specific the predictions become less accurate" and just xed out B because it was about getting more accurate

I originally chose D, but I decided against it because of the very large. To me "made with screens that are.... very large" reads as if you are making the compound screen out of other very large screens. This could not be true because the whole point is that you are making the compound screens out of small screens.

I was able to get this question right, but did not catch the logic flaw in distinguishing between one and all. I was able to get it right only by catching the sufficiency necessary flaw. Do you think there will ever be a case where you need to catch both flaws and some answers will have only a single of the flaws?

#help

Are these questions still helpful now that the logic games section is removed from the LSAT? These questions feel very logic gamey to me.

Do you think it ever makes sense to jot down your low res summary? I have been finding it helpful as I try to apply the curriculum to RC for the first time. Especially in the revisit the passage stage, it really helps me form my mental map as I can see how everything I jotted comes together to create the shape of the passage.

For question 11 can someone explain why B is wrong. JY crossed it off with no explanation, but that is the answer I chose.

It says interpretation of visual cues is what they meant by cognition in the narrowest sense. I thought that this was the correct answer because, to me, that seems like what objectivism is pursuing. No thinking, just a straight recollection of what you saw in order to to get to the objective truth of what happened.

When it says Science Passages will be removed soon, for what test is that referring to? If I am taking the test in September, should I worry about the passages? Are those still useful lessons even though the style of passage is being removed?

I am struggling to see how B is incorrect. Especially after the talk of false positives and false negatives in the beginning makes me think B works even better. The argument is that the new computer controlled systems have more ways to fail so it will create more false positives. But what if all of the ways the new system fails only creates false negatives? That seems like an assumption the stimulus is making, that B attacks, therefore weakening the argument.