Hi! I am having difficulty with predicting descriptive flaw questions. If anyone has done this question can you please explain to me how the correct answer is D.
I was stuck between D and E and I finally chose D because it looks like more reasonable than E.
But I still don't get why D is right and E is wrong and see what's the difference which makes them a right/wrong answer between them.
http://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-4-question-09/
Can someone explain why D is not the right answer? I was struggling between B and D but eventually chose D.
I'm really having trouble with this question. Am I supposed to approach it as a sufficient assumption question though it's a flaw question? Thanks in advance!
Can someone diagram the logic of this question? I don't see where the latter part of answer choice A can be inferred from the stimulus?.
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-4-question-09/
Even though this question is old, it has several lessons built into it. I was able to parse this question out mainly because of the lessons on 7Sage. The first lesson I see with this question is the importance of being attuned to the grammar of the LSAT ...
So I am still working on figuring out SA questions. I came across this question the other day in drills and have no idea how the correct answer connects with the passage above.
I can see where the connection may be but it still doesn't make ...
Are we supposed to assume that these chemicals are initially "harmless" or that the dilution process caused them to become harmless? There is nothing in the passage discussing whether or not the chemicals are harmless.
This might be a silly question but for D... It says "A scientific model that contains **many** elements is not a good theory"
And, on the premise, in order to be a good scientific theory your model needs to be simple enough to ...
Having serious problems with figuring out this question. E is the right answer, but I chose B. My thinking for B is that it may have been a coincidence that all three times Monroe had eaten at Tip-Top, was already ill beforehand but ...
Hey guys. I’m hoping some of you LSAT masters can help with this question. I’ve been trying to wrap my brain around it for the past few days with no luck. I understand it is a correlation/ causation flaw, but I can’t seem to understand why D is the AC and ...
I want to know why answer E is wrong. In Manhattan Prep. It says "everyday food" is irrelevent to the question. However, couldnt water be part of everyday food? Is this also making assumptions?
I have been reading through some of the previous posts regarding this question, and they have really helped me understand the stimulus and why it is wrong. Basically, the author gave us the following premise:
Hi, would really appreciate any thoughts on this question. My understanding of the stimulus is as follows:
Support NT --> /chance of elect.
Und E -->/support NT
Conclusion: Und E --> Chance of elect.
I’ve spent 40mins on this question. Can someone please help me to see if I’m making sense. At this point, I’m googling everyday vocabulary I come across in LSAT cuz this test will make you question your understanding of words you use everyday. The whole ...
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?
This is a necessary assumption question. The correct answer : "parts that satisfy our govt standards are not the same poor quality as cheap foreign parts." But the premise already states that the country has the toughest automotive tests in the world. I ...
Conservative: Socialists study history, and they do so to identify trends that inevitably lead to a socialist future. However, this undertaking is certain to fail, because it is only retroactively that historical trends appear inevitable.
I personally find this the hardest LR question in PT 14; it is (1) bizarre on the level of content, (2) very long and overloads test takers with information, and (3) at the very end of the fourth section, thus hitting you at a point of the test where you ...
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."