http://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-35-section-4-question-07/
This question asks us to identify a flaw.
Attorney: I ask you to find Mr.Smith guilty of assaulting Mr.Jackson. Regrettably, there were no eyewitness to the crime but Mr.Smith ...
I still don't understand why answer choice E is wrong. My understanding is, iIf stress is a symptom of a weakened immune system, then wouldn't that mean that symptoms such as stress then lead to or cause the weakened immune system?
However i'm having a tough time seeing how (B) and (C) are incorrect.
I initially picked (B)
My reasoning was that the opponent raises an important point: That irradiation fails ...
I chose C because it is weakening the argument which is saying that people are more concerned about their finances than politics and C says that they are JUST AS concerned about their finances and politics thus weakening the argument and I thought E was ...
Can someone please help me comprehend why "reducing stress can help weakened immune system" is same as "stress can weaken the immune system" ? It seems like invalid negation to me...
The answer for this question is B. I understand why B is right, but I was not able to fully eliminate why D is wrong (I understand why A, C, and E are wrong). The reason why I am still not sure why D is wrong is because D states that, ...
In this passage, I picked D because I interpreted Rito using the phrase "serious underestimates" as the severity of the underestimate of the raw numbers, while Hiro uses “surely underestimate” as an acceptance that there is an underestimate but not ...
Could someone help me ID what flaw is in the stimulus and why answer choice D is wrong? Is D incorrect because the skeptic is assuming Debbie used another technique aside from the three he was originally testing for? And is the sleight of hand, trick deck, ...
Can someone help me to identify opponent's argument, since I don't see clearly where is a conclusion and where are premises. All I see is a set of premises with unstated(assumed) conclusion. Thank you!! #help
The rule is "Either P is an ingredient or Y is an ingredient, but not both." It's easy enough to see that both of them cannot be in, but does this rule mandate that AT LEAST one of them is in? If so, can you also point me to the lecture in the core ...
For this question answer choice C is correct which makes sense to me. I picked D because I thought the analogy between car technology and computer technology worked well. My question is: are answer choices with analogies usually wrong on strengthening ...
A is wrong because we cant say many old people as we dont know the definition of old for Rotelle. If she considers 60+ old or 80+ old.
B is wrong because it says people as old as Sims are the only those. There could be more people.
C is ...
Could anyone provide an example of a stimulus or anything that fits into the answer C? It doesn't actually have to be matching the content in C, just the form of "confusing x with y".
Thanks for your response Jonathan, my question was about PT35.S1.Q18. I think a mod edited my post when I originally posted it, and put int he wrong question. I've just seen it and changed it back.
... of stimulus" E.g. PT60.S1.Q7 (P4) - weakened immune system cancer ... question" E.g. PT40.S2.Q7 (G2) - could be true of ... of question" E.g. PT37.S1.Q12 - Political scientist: Efforts to ...