Im having a little trouble understanding why answer choice D is correct. I understood the flaw that an absence of proof for something to be false, does not make it true the minute i read it.
However the wording in Answer choice D is confusing me. ...
I'm a little confused about why the video explanation shows the first sentence as PISM --most--> /DOR. I thought that the "without" would negate the first part of the sentence and it would look like /PISM --most--> DOR. If someone could explain ...
So i see why AC (B) demolishes the argument and is clearly the correct AC. But does AC (A) weaken it as well?
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-44-section-2-question-20/
I find myself struggling with Disagree questions. It's difficult to keep the moving parts together and find the overlap. Especially when there are embedded clauses which obfuscate the domain of discourse or in particularly loooong questions such as this ...
Can someone please explain why AC E is wrong? I understand why D is the correct AC but I am having trouble eliminating E, more importantly I am having trouble understanding what E is saying in the first place. Thank you!
...
So for this one I was having a lot of trouble because I couldn't see how any of the answers could be true based off the stimulus. Can someone explain this question to me please? Ty!
I got this question right during the PT by POE (A-B reverses necessary and sufficient terms, ACD all use most-statements) but in BR I really had to labor over the logic. It ...
I just can't even understand what this question is saying, let alone understand the logic underneath it. Can someone shed some light as to what makes this stimulus so hard to understand?
If someone can really break this down that would be ...
This question tripped me up a bit, not because I didn't understand what I was being asked to do, but because I couldn't really differentiate between some of the answer choices.
I find this to be the most interesting LR question I've come across, because I'm pretty darn sure it requires you to make an inference leap based on common sense. Rule #1 ...
for AC b i equated many=some and chose e instead as it was a statement for “most” systems….but suppose since it is ratios in consideration similarity weighs more (hence not ...
would AC e be a close second....i seem to have glossed over d and missed it choosing e realizing my folly on BR. But isn't e another version of d so plausible in the absence ...
would it be a good way to think alternative to JY's explanation that answer choice B is wrong merely in having few as the existential indicator rather than a universal ...
So... I am watching the PT 61 LG section while FPing and I am having a little trouble understanding how JY got the contrapostive for R2 /U in the game. Can someone please clarify? Thank you so much!