@maliakbryant421 said:

Hello? Can you add me to the group please?

hey Brian, sorry for my delayed reply. Can you dm me and I’ll send you my phone number!

@kediaeholly101629 said:

I'd be interested in joining a study group! Is there room for more people

I can form a groups of 3-4 if you are interested.

@agnesghol942 said:

Here for it

let me know if you are interested!

@hc728661 said:

Interested! Im in the same boat as you

dm you！

@agnesghol942 said:

Hey, I need a study buddy.

Great dm you!

@gronkspike5260 said:

yo

Hey thanks for keeping this alive lol

I am! Let me know if you are still looking for a study buddy!

I am not giving advice on how to release test day anxiety because I personally can’t sleep the night before any big test….

but a few tips that had helped me in my January test and gets me a 172(within my pt ranges).

-try meditation, 10minutes before your test can calm your brain and possibly give it a reboots if you had insomnias like I did the night before test

-try caffeine, different ones (redbull or coffee, energy drink)

-during your break, try deep breathing and push-ups

Understand your problem:

Is the material that bothers or is it your mental stress?

one way to think about this is to ask ourself, if D is the right answer, how would it weaken the argument? D could weaken the argument by saying this there's the cause when effect is absent (low-L group), it gives us a hint without doing the job B is doing which is :

B directly points out there's something else in the veggies and fruits other than L that's responsible for the decrease in stroke.

But I had a different reason for eliminating A. A sounds more like an AC that we could encounter in required assumption questions. Even A is correct in Eliminating a possible alternative hypothesis, it still doesn’t strengthen the argument much—- why does it makes the new hypothesis more likely to be true? It is a much weaker choice comparing to D which it directly lends support to the new hypothesis.

this was exactly what I was thinking in choosing between A and D. Thank you so much for this!!!

Thank you!! Yes, I've seem both happened to be correct in the past. This is actually from The LSAT Trainer, and Mike Kim chose 1) as well. > @rochishatogare811 said:

I feel like this is risky enough (with students complaining that both answers are right) that LSAC wouldn't give both in the same question unless the stimulus matched one exactly. But if I had to pick I'd lean towards (1). In the end A --> B, B--> C is just A --> C. If we then erroneously say C, therefore A, it's generally the same as the stimulus since we're affirming the necessary condition in both cases.

But ACs in flaw questions don't worded in ways that involve could/possible. It is more like:

fails to consider, ignores the possibility that something "do" happen, not "could" happen.

For example, the correct way to put A within a "fails to consider the possibility" context, A has to say:

"the argument fails to consider the possibility that the families in the experiment who were not given a medical self-help book acquired...."

But in here, A is actually saying something like:

"the argument fails to consider the possibility that it is possible that the families in the experiment who were not given a medical self-help book acquired...."

hope it helps

It feels like too specific but it is the author's point, A would be more general and can compatible with any one of the three techniques. A main point question doesn't have to include everything, as long as it contains the author's MAIN point.

The rule of thumb for a necessary assumption is whether it passes the negation test. If D says something more absolute, then its negation would be something less absolute. Given an example If answer choice D phrased as:

"if there's a behavior common to people of widely disparate cultures, then there's definitely a genetic predisposition to that behavior"

The negation of the above would look like:

"even if there's a behavior common to people of widely disparate, cultures, it is not necessarily true that there's definitely a genetic predisposition to that behavior".

Our stimulus will still hold with this negation, as the negation just says it is not necessarily true, so it could be true that people are genetically predisposed.

Changing from "probably" to "definitely" will be a correct sufficient assumption answer but will not be a correct necessary answer.

I was not able to follow through JY's explanation for this question, so I reasoned out my own thoughts for those of you who are still confused after watching this video:

if beauty = truth, then :

"most realistic" → "the best"

because "most realistic"→ "most truthful".

From here, we get "most realistic"→"most truthful"→"the best".

But "most realistic"("most truthful") /→ "the best",

therefore beauty/=truth

we can see "truth" defined as the "most realistic/most truthful", but we still need to connect the other "undefined" term of beauty to "the best".

I narrow down to A and D

A "the most beautiful artworks are the best artwork" (negation" the most beautiful artworks are not the best, argument falls apart"

D "only the best artwork are beautiful" (negation "not only the best artwork are beautiful, others can be beautiful as well. This doesn't destroy the argument")

I was not able to identify which one is the correct answer choice, using the negation test. I figure out A is necessary, while the negation of D is not necessary.

just want to point out something I saw from other people's explanation. The assumption this argument is making is not that "confidence in their own immediate economic situation" unrelated to "the state of the economy", but instead is how "the state of the economy" don't affect "confidence in their own immediate economic situation". The former can lead to answer choice A whereas the latter leads to D.

I will change my name to JY if I get a 175

If B is negated, “Compounding the deficiencies” would give us a reason why resolution matters.

JY discussed the flaw in the argument, “what if there’s something else that makes the differences between resolutions matter?” B kind of touch on this assumption.

Hope it helps.

B “producing more cortisol than average in response to stress helps prevent a person from developing PTSD as a result of experiencing a traumatic event.”

It confused me when I first read the AC, but reading the answer choice in the following way helps a lot!

: “as a result of experiencing a traumatic event” is a modifier for “PTSD”.

The negation of D would be “ if something appreciably affects large-scale weather pattern, it is not necessarily cyclical in nature.”ok, but we want to know when it is cyclical, is it due to human activity or nature? This negation would weaken if the argument concludes something like “there’s a seven-day cycles(cyclical pattern), It will likely be due to human activity”.

I think the “7-day cycle” is pointing to the 7-day weather pattern that workdays are more cloudier than weekends.

a solution that is intended for a problem is not guaranteed to eliminate the problem.