This was obviously a tough question, and after hours of tearing out my hair, I understand where the flaw is and why answer choice E is correct. Yet, there is still one component I am confused about.
I am having difficulty seeing why the correct answer in this question is D. The argument shows that two methods of investigation yielded different results. The conclusion then states that there is no need to look further for an explanation of the ...
Still trying to tease out the stimulus on this one. I don't understand what the two different DNA tests are or how they are confused or what the assumption is.
Premise: DNA tests can't distinguish among samples from different people. ...
I can't see why (E) is wrong. Could anyone explain why (D) is right?? Appreciate in advance
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-2-question-04/
Can someone please confirm that I have this chain correct? I became confused with the "cannot" in the first premise. Now I'm presuming "cannot" is modifying the sufficient clause since this premise includes "unless." Please correct me if I'm wrong. I was ...
Couldn't we make the inference that only R and Z can be in slot 1? I was going to split the board on those but realized I didn't have enough info. I quickly eliminated A on question 1 without second thought because I scanned to eliminate any AC that didn't ...
Hey, guys. Has anyone noticed any funky games such as this one in recent PT? JY said don't worry but there seems to be a trend of the older style games coming back. How would I ever know to draw a freaking star?!! I'm sure it could be solved other ways. I ...
PT 77, Section 2, #18 Answer Choices C and D. Does "fails to exclude" mean the same thing more or less as "fails to consider"?
I thought "fails to exclude" was incorrect because the author doesn't need to exclude it, he just failed to consider it. ...
I got this wrong because while I did see the author was appealing to authority, I thought it was reasonable to assume that if the author says what an authority figure says, then it can be said that the author would say that too.
I don't get the explanation for why A is right. All we know is that do produce a good meal you can't have bad food. That would seem to imply that you could have a good meal with mediocre food. So how can you then take the the next conditional relationship ...
The answer for this question is E. I don't think any of the answers really have a logic structure that parallels to that of the stimulus. For the stimulus I got:
I need some help with this question. I got the right answer but in Blind Review I changed the answer to a wrong choice. The right answer is D. I understand why that is right. The problem I have is trying to determine why A is wrong. Is it just that A ...
I just recently solved the question referenced above, a MBT question with heavy conditional reasoning. I understand why TCR is what it is, but it took me WAY too long to solve this question. Even in hindsight/BR, I don't know ...
I thought that this was an example of a part to whole fallacy. The author concludes that the decrease in revenue is exaggerated because part (parts and service companies) of the industry have succeeded even after admitting that manufacturers' share of the ...
hi, can someone explain why answer choice e isnt a match? I'm still not 100% sure after BRing and watching the explination vid.
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-2-question-21/
I could use some help with this necessary assumption question. I definitely see why C is a necessary assumption, but I'm having a hard time figuring out why E is not also an equally necessary assumption. I have yet to find an ...