After watching video, I understand why A is true. Yet, I still confuse about (D). Is it not a flaw?
The link is here https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-29-section-4-question-14/
Good lord, I find this question frustrating and I cannot for the life of me determine how any single one of these answers could be seen as satisfactory.
This is the question where West says that Haynes is the worst inspector. I honestly ...
For the June 2007 Prep Test, for Section 4 (RC) and question #13 ("Which of the following principles underlies the arguments in both passages?") I see why E is correct, but why is D incorrect ("The discovery of the neutrological ...
I know (A) is correct since it points out there may be no relation between jury decision and testimony. Yet, I'm still confused about (B). Is it descriptively wrong since the stimulus only says one fact instead of two facts?
Even though this question is old, it has several lessons built into it. I was able to parse this question out mainly because of the lessons on 7Sage. The first lesson I see with this question is the importance of being attuned to the grammar of the LSAT ...
Despite reviewing JY's explanation (https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-4-question-25/), I don't understand why answer choice (C) is incorrect while (D) is correct.
For one thing, how is answer choice (C) different from PT29 ...
So we have this health study that found that people who gained approximately 1 pound per year after the age of 35 tended, on the whole, to live longer than those who maintained the weight they had at 35. However, there have been ...
/Q-->/D D-->W in the 7sage lesson, the teacher said /Q-->/D and /W-->/D, thus, there's no inference made. However, isn't we also can do it like D-->Q and D-->W, thus, some Q are W?