As we all know, matching the formal elements in answer choices to the stimulus is a good way to find the correct answer on Parallel type questions. However, on this question, only the flaw matches and but the formal elements don't, in ...
Could someone be so kind to explain why AC B is correct? I went with E, quite confidently at that. Any insight is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!
Does anybody have any idea why the answer choice is (a) for this question? I couldn't find an answer so I ended up eliminating all of the answer choices because none of them seemed to make sense. Answer choice (a) seems to strengthen the argument, if ...
I know it's a bad idea to argue with LSAT answers, but I find it's the best way to improve - I want to really understand exactly why my thinking is wrong. I can't seem to find out an adiqute explination for why D is wrong for this question, would love ...
How do you distinguish between answer choice A and answer choice D? While I understand why A is correct, why is D incorrect? If almost all citations result in fines, shouldn't "nearly all" of the landowners at 48+ hours be fined?
This is the main point question from the Gilman Passage
Can some one please explain why (A) is incorrect? I was stuck between A and D, but chose A because D does not say ANYTHING about there being two different theories, which was basically ...
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
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!
My issue with this stimulus is about the term consent versus consult. If ANY of the members had said "No" to the release of this report, would that still mean the chairperson consulted them?
So I had a really difficult time with this question because of answer choice A. When it says "takes for granted," is that saying the author is assuming the information in this choice to be true? And why isn't the information in A pointing out a flaw? If it ...
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.
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 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 ...