I need some help with this question. i watched and read the explanations, and while i now understand how to eliminate the other choices, i still don't quite get why answer C is the necessary assumption. Here's how i broke down the ...
The question gives you an initial claim as well as a principle to go with it. The stem asks for you to pick an AC that could be appropriately used as a premise for an argument that uses the principle in the stimulus. I see this as more of a pseudo- ...
Why would the program care about if they have "serious problems" when they said they needed to focus on building competence just to stay on air. B sounds too vague to me
I'm struggling to note why the E choice does not also fit the bill. Since it eliminates a potential threat to the argument - and it also would weaken the argument if it were true.
Struggling with this one. The negation of E wrecks the argument and is what I picked, but I am having a really difficult time eliminating A. Any thoughts on how to justify getting rid of it? Thanks!
I do not understand why the answer is C (Not having his third meal with peppers) rather than A (not having any meal with peppers. Can someone explain this so I can better understand?
I chose correctly during the actual PT but picked wrong during BR. I'm having trouble finding the conclusion in the passage to find the correct inference. I picked AC: A because I thought the other choices were irrelevant.
Posted this as a comment under the Problem Set, but am really unsure of why my reasoning is incorrect so looking for help. Won't add the question here so it doesn't act as a spoiler but I've referenced the question in the post title.
Hello fellow 7Sagers! I figured we were all in this LSAT Journey together, so I decided to create this discussion thread for this particular question/type. I did get the answer correct, so in this thread I will be going through my thought process; I am ...
Hi, I am confused as to why the correct answer is C? I felt C was a different argument since the final conclusion was " wise investors will conclude that the expansion will continue for some time"
This question was tough for me. I thought I didn't need the third sentence. Picked D but wasn't confident with it. Not sure how E is correct. Please help.
i’m having difficulty with this parallel flaw question. I chose answer be as it has the same logical structure as the stimulus and reasoning. What am I missing?
**Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief ...
High blood cholesterol -> increased risk of stroke by blood clots
Low blood cholesterol -> increased risk of OTHER stroke by cerebral hermorrhage (how? Low bc weakens artery ...
I am not understanding how D is the correct answer. I actually chose D before blind review, mainly as a gut instinct to look back over later. Upon blind review, I changed my answer to B.
I now understand why B is wrong, as all we know is that many ...
I'm having trouble translating the conclusion of the argument into logical form, perhaps because of the word "solely." The conclusion states that "it is **solely** due to ... peppers that he became ill."
- I chose D because the mention of "examples". However I overlooked the word "intent" in this answer choice, which makes it incorrect, because the author never indicated that JAM has the monarch's "intent" wrongly interpreted, they simply argues that the ...
Hey, so according to the question bank, PT21.S2.Q21 is parallel flaw is that the you're asking about? Since you mentioned that a seems to strengthen the argument