Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.2K All Categories
- 27.1K LSAT
- 16.5K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 7 June 2024 LSAT
- 1 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 41 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 1 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 3.9K Law School Admissions
- 11 Law School Explained
- 9 Forum Rules
- 580 Technical Problems
- 275 Off-topic
PT84.S2.Q11 - Political candidates debate performances
emmorens
Core Member
Just took PT 84 - wondering if anyone found the LR kind of weird? Not hard per se, but for example PT 84 S2 Q2 (an NA) was more of a soft NA answer? They are usually a lot more clear. Idk maybe I’m just being picky but I found there were a couple questions where the answers were a lot more subtle to me.
Anyways, onto PT 84 S2 Q11
I knew AC was right but crossed it off because I thought it attacked a premise. Looking back it appears I misread the stimulus.
The premise says: “Many features ..." Admin Note: I deleted the premise and Answer Choice C as it is against our Forum Rules to post LSAT questions on the Forum.
And AC C says: "Excessive blinking ..."
I thought that the stimulus read “excessive blinking is not such a feature of confidence” (rather than saying "blink rate is not a feature")
My question is, if it had said what I thought it said, would AC C have been an attack on the premise like I thought it was?
Admin Note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-84-section-2-question-11/