- Joined
- Aug 2025
- Subscription
- Live
Admissions profile
Discussions
Knowing this was a SA question, I was able to quickly select C by process of elimination since all the other answer choices introduced new ideas/links in the chain.
A - "refuse to join" is not mentioned in the stem, outside scope of the stim
B - "greater wealth" is not mentioned in the stem, outside scope of the stim
D - not strong is not logically equivalent to weak
E - "economically beneficial" is not mentioned in the stem, outside scope of the stim
If I had remaining time at the end of the section, I would come back and map it out to double-check. But if diagramming confuses you and takes you time to understand (like me), this is a good strategy to make sure you're not wasting time + banking time to review it at the end!
@SirHarvey The flaw in the argument is that it assumes the absence of evidence is the same as a theory being false. To strengthen the argument, we want to establish this missing link by demonstrating that scientists would be able to detect a neutron star if it existed. The other ACs don't address this flaw in the argument, which is why B is correct.
I am still confused about why AC A most strengthens the conclusion. I eliminated A because it emphasizes similarities between the two bands that are already established in the premise. Regardless of the music arranger, we already know that they have a similar style and lyrics.
D, on the other hand, establishes an assumption that I thought was missing. The explanation notes that "maybe she only likes and listens to Moral Vacuum’s music and no other rock artists." This was something I also considered and is why I chose D. While it's true that just because she likes rock doesn't mean she likes all rock music, the premise that she would like The Curel Herd because of their similarities as rock bands is undermined if Moral Vacuum is the only rock band she likes.
I didn't love D as an AC, but I'm not really convinced about A either. Could someone break this down for me?
I selected E, because the stimulus states "synesthesiacs ... do not respect the usual boundaries between the five recognized senses." Having eliminated all other ACs, I concluded that "do not respect" was logically equivalent to "unable to respect." Thus, E demonstrated an ability for synesthesiacs' senses to "respect the usual boundaries," even if temporarily.
After reviewing the explanations, I understand why E is incorrect and why A is correct, but during my first pass, the interpretation that synesthesiacs had been answering all the questions incorrectly had not even occurred to me.
For 3a, can we eliminate it just from the phrase "such as a judge or a police officer," since the stimulus doesn't provide an example?
@JR For the sake of maximizing my study material, is it best for me to take the old practices right now on classic.7sage before LSAC pulls them? Or should I just switch over to the new platform and start taking the newer tests?
I selected D by process of elimination, but I still don't love it. The specification of "substantial items" made me weary of pick D, since it could be true that faculty salaries and need-based aid could have significantly increased and also not made up a substantial portion of the budget. For example, faculty salaries might have (hypothetically) made up only 1% of the budget and increased to 5% -- that's a significant increase yet still making up very little of the budget.