... say that the logic games section is lowering your average or ... is it another section? i'm curious what section or sections change ... PTs. There is one PT game section that was an exception for ...
... similar games to this one. PT11 Game 4 is in the ... themselves to immediate setups though: PT 77 Game 3 for instance ... , PT 40 Game 3, PT 6 game 4.
@nantesorkestar said:
I just can't see any assumptions the argument is making. In my opinion, C might weaken the argument if the insertion occurs at a random spot. Doesn't this contradict that the fragments are in the same location?
@bbank0218 @DByrne07
I had the same setup! I definitely had the same section1 and section 5 LR, but I'm pretty sure I had a different section 3. I think that was the experimental one.
Absolutely! Section1 went somewhat well (RC), I felt pretty good about section 2 ... 'm not mistaken, my third section/second RC was the experimental ... I hope it was! 4th section (LR) didn't go so ...
Very much agree with what's above, I also think drilling and Bring some of the earliest PT LR section is useful. It kinda gives you a window into the LSAT writers first intention with LR and helped me see a bird's eye view of the section.
... that it has taken me 1 calendar year: about 1200 games ... from scratch. Start with PT 2 Game 1. Do it three times ... it cannot go in spot 1. These are the reoccurring inference ... time.
@lllllllll said:
Because McElligott's citrus juices HAVE NOT BEEN LINKED TO ANY BACTERIAL INFECTIONS, can't I assume that they contain less infectious bacteria than M'S apple juice?
No, you can never assume. All we know is that the ...
This is an excellent list that I will be bookmarking. Thank you. PT 29 Section 4 Question 24 is illustrative. A very complex weakening question containing causation.