The correct answer is B. However, I originally selected A because this answer seems to be linked to the premise following the conclusion. Answer A incorporated the information that came after since, which is a premise indicator.
Can someone explain this question to me please? I totally dont get it. I dont see why superior conductors even have to exist in order for this argument to hold true. I dont really see any of the ACs as being viable.
Like, one could say that the ...
Can someone help me to check if my analysis is right?
Premise:
Two group of fish: one traditionally raised with dull routine and the experimental hatcheries raised in stimulating routine
The experimental hatcheries was bolder ...
Here is my analysis for question 17 in section 3 for prep test 72. This is a weaken question; therefore, I wanted to weaken the connection between the premises and the conclusion.
Argument Analysis:
In this question why do we "attack" the premise. I thought we don't really try to attack the premise but in this question it does. How often does this type of question show up on the LSAT? I understand this question just a little bit but I am unsure why ...
Hi! So I understand why D is correct but I thought that the sentence "the position that X is unsustainable" was the position the author was trying to defend. In that he/she is defending that it is unsustainable. Why is this thought process not right? It's ...
Can anyone explain how the author is "impugning" the motives of Roehmer in the last sentence? It really doesn't look like the author is questioning/attacking Roehmer's motives at all-- the author is just ...
I have a quick question regarding the third passage of PT18. I don't quite get question #17. The answer is C, which states that the council "did not have complete autonomy in governing the Cherokee Nation." But how are we ...
Hi, I would appreciate it if someone could explain how "that style of argumentation" in the third sentence refers to "impugning the motives" instead of "taken a partisan stance". I thought "a partisan stance" can be said as a style of argumentation. ...
Can anyone explain why E is the correct answer choice? I thought the premise sets out that we could only choose from anarchy and totalitarian government control. If we cannot question the premise, why is this E correct? Thanks!