I understand the conclusion is saying that the airlines should remove seats that impede the exit because many fatalities are due to the cabin design of the seats. Here is my issue, many = some.. so when I look at it this way maybe 1 collision is like this ...
For this particular question, I'm not really sure why answer choice B is correct over answer choice C. In the LSAT, do motives usually apply to reasons relating to self-interest, such as profit-motive? Additionally, aren't presuppositions or assumptions ...
For this particular problem, I wasn't able to clearly articulate why answer choice C was incorrect. I interpreted the conclusion to be a causal one, specifically one that claims that the author's political party is responsible for the decrease in ...
So I got this one wrong and picked C when A is the correct AC. It's just not clicking for me how this is correct. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
I was stuck on this question for a long time, trying to figure out what is going on. In the end, I think I got my head around it. Can someone check my work please?
This was a difficult question about dinosaurs, fossil evidence and their argued relationship with reptiles. Many users chose AC D) but E) is correct. I can't seen to figure out what the "two present-day" phenomena are, can anyone help a gal out? THANK YOU ...
This question took me a lot of time but i still dont get why A is the answer because in A arent we affirming the consequent which is a conditional logic error ( if x then y - all poor then honest ; if y then x - all honest if poor )???
I got this question right during my PT and wrong during BR. I kept fluctuating between A (the right answer) and D (the wrong answer). I totally get why A is right but I do not understand why D is wrong. SOS.
The question stem for this question asks us to pick an answer choice that shows that the explanation we were given in the stimulus is only a "partial one." I was doing this question as part of my weakening problem set. I read through the stimulus and was ...
The stimulus talks about the number of visits per representative decreasing from 640 to 501, but does that mean the number of visits per pharmacist decreased as well? Is it possible the number of visits per pharmacist from these representatives possibly ...
Okay so I can see why E could be the correct answer. But I just wasn't sure whether there was both government inaction (maybe the government is just but they are acting) and he did everything in good faith.
Can someone please explain how D is correct? because when I read it, it did not seem like it would strengthen the argument, since its says consumers added smaller quantiles of coconut oil as oppose to whole milk.