I got it right. But I don't know why J.Y said we can can make "some" statement by contrapositive. The relationship is about "all" statement.
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-2-question-23/
Any idea?
For those who have a math or econ or business background.
We learned that of any financial or math model, there are 2 kinds of variables-Endogenous and Exdogenous. And from macro-econ or Linear Algebra, the change of an endogenous variable ...
So I got this one wrong and picked C when A is the correct AC. It's just not clicking for me how this is correct. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Flaw Question-- calling all folks who are a beast at LR:) HELP?
I understand that the answer is C but I want to make sure that I'm breaking down the argument correctly:
*Best way to understand --> Direct Empathy (that's what some ...
Im trying to look for answers to the LR questions from PT9. Before the digital change, you could enter it manually or find them. Now, its forcing me to take the test digital first
I am confused about the word “generally” in the conclusion.
**To Recap The argument form in Lawgic:**
**P1**: Emotional Tendencies /(Changed)
**Required Premise**: Emotional Tendencies /(Changed)-> Generally /(Able to choose ...
Did anyone else get rid of A and C and choose B because it seemed as though A and C were essentially the same answer and therefore neither one of them could have been correct?
Can I infer some are -P from the statement that most people are P? I think saying most people are mortal does not mean some people are immortal, but the correct AC of this question seems to suggest the otherwise. Is this a bad LR question?
Can someone help explain this question to me? It's the first LR question I haven't been able to understand, even after blind review and review. I chose answer choice B.
I don't understand how executives from other companies setting salaries higher could have an impact on the salaries of executives from other companies?