"If males are assigned to Veblen South, then Wisteria North is assigned males."
Can I take the contrapositive of this as such: "If Wisteria North is **not** assigned males, then Veblen South is **not** assigned males." And then translate ...
So this question is easy enough when I take a moment to write out the logic. Even so, I'd like some advice on how to attempt this without enough time to parse out and write down the logic of each answer choice until I get to the right one. Unless the rule ...
I am unable to fully comprehend this question and cannot materialize it into an example involving actual numbers (this question seems like a math question to me). Is anyone able to help using examples? Thank you!
I just missed your group study on Jan 8th. Here is one question I don't know why C is the best answer to Q13.
As the two sentences are responses from Bordwell in proving musicals still fit into his theory, he mentioned ...
The question asks what the word "succession" in line 57 refers to. I read back over the part and thought that it referred to the action of "clearing followed by regular burning" and picked A. However it is C and I don't really understand why?
I'm having a hard time understanding why answer choice D) in Question 13 is wrong even though I have watched the video multiple times already. I was left with C) and D) timed.
Initially I thought "large geographical areas" in D) was fine b/c ...
What I wrote down for BR: I do not see an answer choice that really strengthens Ms. Fring's argument. However, if a company follows an experts advice and the result was very little profit(ac E) I believe that would be a substantial example allowing us to ...
Would somebody please help me. I am having an awfully hard time with the RC questions and I feel that some answer choices can be debated as opinionated.
I am finding the RC questions much harder than the LG.
I've been looking at this question for the last 20 minutes, watched the JY's explanation, and looked through the comments. Still have no idea what is going on. Can someone help explain it to me?
I don't really understand answer choice A) if there is no overwhelming evidence for or against a hypo. then one should "suspend judgment as to its truth". What does it mean by "as to its truth"? Anyone could help?
I found this to be an incredibly difficult question. I did get the question right, but I did not feel good at all about my answer choice timed or in blind review. I eliminated the other answer choices because they just ...
Although I was able to get the right answer, I am not sure if my identification of the main conclusion was correct. Can anybody help me with this, please. Thank you in advance!!
I am retaking this PT and I **really** struggled with this passage. In particular, I have trouble understanding the difference between studies being debunked vs. studies giving two opposing facts. ...
I am having such a tough time on this question. I have written out my thinking, watched the explanation a few times and I am still stumped by this question. Answer C is ...
I find this strengthening question particularly tricky. Can anyone help explain why E) is the correct answer? Also explaining why C) isn't would be helpful!
In this question why do we "attack" the premise. I thought we don't really try to attack the premise but in this question it does. How often does this type of question show up on the LSAT? I understand this question just a little bit but I am unsure why ...
what's the difference between any given molecule of substance and molecule of any substance in this case.... substance is really broad... not like they said substance 'X' or something.