I picked C for both during the timed run and blind review.
I read from another post that C is wrong because it's mixing up the sufficiency and necessity condition but I'm still not seeing that this is the case.
This question proved to be incredibly challenging for me. Could someone please define how the argument used two different uses of the term "selfish?" Thanks in advance!
Like many others, I was stuck between A and C here. However, while I do understand JY's explanation that a "claim" does not need support while an "argument" does, I thought A was correct here because the second sentence of the stimulus ...
I have trouble understanding answer choice B. What is it like to be ambiguous in an LR stimulus? When I was doing this question under timed, I thought ambiguous notion of knowledge was the author does not state whether her example of ...
So while I did understand why the wrong answer choices were wrong here, I had trouble understanding why E was right. Can anyone explain their reasoning here?
The reason I had trouble understanding why E was right was ...
sch.
c=.. fail to consider the human costs that consumers pay in nationalized insurance
p- high tech medicine is restricted
p2- transplants are rationed
p3- people are denied treatments they want and need
-
laf.
I interpreted "D" as saying that new fields had been found since "oil that is considered unextractable is now considered extractible." For "D" to be correct, I thought we had to make the assumption that the shift between unextractable to extractible was ...
This section alone has four weaken questions!!! I don't think i've ever had a section with so many flaw and weaken questions together... anyway, since JY's explanation videos are not available yet, I want to put these confusing ones out here for discussion ...
**Admin Note: Edited to remove the Question Stem and Answer Choices. Please review the [Forum Rules](https://7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/15). Explanation Video: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-59-section-2-question-15/**
I don't understand how A would strengthen the argument. If even a few members of Group B ate nutritious breakfasts and didn't increase their productivity as much as Group A did, wouldn't that weaken the argument even if Group A has a stronger correlation ...
If you have done this passage and got Q14 right, would you mind explaining your thought process? The passage says "the second rationale is that a punishment is justified by severity of a crime." This leads me to interpret that the consequence (severity) of ...
Hi! I don't really understand why B is wrong even after reading numerous explanations. If areas subject to **more fires** (which is true when the level of rainfall drops below normal for an extended period of time like in a drought) tend to be **less ...