My big issue with this question is about why B is the correct answer. It seems to equate "exploiting" with "destroy" and I'm not sure how reasonable of an assumption that is to make. Since this is a logically inferred question, I assumed that the right ...
Any chance someone is willing to help me understand why the correct answer choice for this question is C? I cannot seem to figure out how one gets to that answer. Thank you!
Hi can someone help me with this game i am missing some of the big inferences and i have watched the explanation 4 times .
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-2-section-3-game-2/
Could anyone shed some light as to the issues with (D)? I didn't select it because I had an eerie feeling about it, but even as I read over it now I can't seem to put my finger on why it's incorrect. The more I read (D), the ...
Hi I was just hoping someone could help me sort out the conditional logic in this stimulus. I feel like there's a gap in my understanding of the first sentence of the stimulus.
The first statement is about archaic spellings being preserved ...
S: An owner of a work of art have the ethical right to destroy that artwork if (1) they find it morally/visually distasteful or (2) caring for it becomes inconvenient. This right to ...
I got this one right almost instinctively (I didn't map this out), but I have a question about the phrase "**_can best be explained if_**" in the second sentence of the ...
Im having a little trouble understanding why answer choice D is correct. I understood the flaw that an absence of proof for something to be false, does not make it true the minute i read it.
However the wording in Answer choice D is confusing me. ...
Hello. I have some trouble in nailing this question.
(C) How could this strengthen the conclusion? The conclusion is about a causation between oval orbits and close encounter with other planets. But this answer choice is correlation; that ...
I'm a little confused about why the video explanation shows the first sentence as PISM --most--> /DOR. I thought that the "without" would negate the first part of the sentence and it would look like /PISM --most--> DOR. If someone could explain ...
I find myself struggling with Disagree questions. It's difficult to keep the moving parts together and find the overlap. Especially when there are embedded clauses which obfuscate the domain of discourse or in particularly loooong questions such as this ...
I chose B under timed conditions but switched to A in BR.
My issue with B is that there are no "potential" criminals here. If B said "nothing should be done to protect criminals at the cost of placing restrictions on law-abiding citizens" ...
I got this question right during the PT by POE (A-B reverses necessary and sufficient terms, ACD all use most-statements) but in BR I really had to labor over the logic. It ...