Is it possible to ask for an explanation for this question. I do not understand why the answer is E and not C. Thanks!
admin note: explanation added!
http://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-4-question-20/
Despite reviewing JY's explanation (https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-4-question-25/), I don't understand why answer choice (C) is incorrect while (D) is correct.
For one thing, how is answer choice (C) different from PT29 ...
Can someone explain how they approached this question and got to answer choice D? Thank you so much in advance!
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-4-question-01/
I didn't pick the right answer choice (C) only because I did not understand what it was saying at all. What does it mean when it says the "first thing's having caused the second?"
Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q ...
I'm currently working on drilling NA and have gone back to re-do the CC lessons on negation. I have slowly started to find success in applying Ellen Cassidy's strategy of finding the loophole in the argument. For this stimulus, my loophole was: What if ...
Are there two flaws in this stimulus? Armand is a mathematician so interior ministry isn’t his area of expertise and even if he doesn’t think the program is successful it doesn’t necessarily mean the figures are inaccurate?
The thing I don’t get is ...
I was revisiting some old PTs and stumbled across this question. It's giving me quite the headache. JY's explanation doesn't help at all because he assumes that the amount of correctly addressed but damaged mail is a small subset of correctly addressed ...
Hi, I am confused on LSAT 29 – Section 1 – Question 16. I don’t understand why we don’t have to assume PIE falls into the group of languages that lacks words for prominent elements. In comparison to LSAT 20 – Section 4 – Question 25, which has a similar ...