Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Accounts Playable
About
- Username
- Accounts Playable
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,927
- Last Active
- Roles
- Sage, ⭐
Comments
-
This is a very hard inference question. If understanding a word always involves knowing the definition, then understanding a word requires understanding the words in the definition. There are people who don't understand the words in the definition…
-
I might be able to shed a little light on this too. I am a CPA, and I decided to go to law school because I want to be a tax attorney (tax judge ideally). I also have a masters of science in accounting and tax (which was sort of like an MBA, altho…
-
Essentially, this argument is a contrapositive type argument, and we are looking for a sufficient assumption. Smith believes that true meaning understood--->Insight into social circumstances. The author then concedes that we are to assume tha…
-
This is a must be true question, and I think you thought this was a sufficient assumption question. The argument begins with a pretty standard conditional statement: (Economic success AND Protecting individual liberty success)----->Overall suc…
-
@mitrakhanom1 Yeah, I wrote this before bed, and I did a pretty bad job explaining my thought process. What I meant to get across was the idea that you don't need to address the premise or evidence of the other person if you are making a countera…
-
T is trying to make a completely independent and unrelated argument compared to M, and that is where the flaw lies: T straw mans M's argument. T's first sentence doesn't correctly characterize M's argument, so T's rebuttal begins all messed up. Th…
-
Usually, causation questions are pretty cookie cutter on the exam. For instance, the argument will begin with a correlation/relationship between two things, but then draw a causal conclusion. Key buzzwords that tend to tip you off that the argumen…
-
I think it helps to breakdown the role of every sentence in the passage. The first sentence is a premise/fact we know to be true. The second sentence is context that adds a bit of tone to the argument: "the increase is troubling." The final sente…
-
Lots and lots of bourbon @nanchito if we are going to look up serial killers, I'd recommend Ted Bundy. At least he went to law school LOL
-
I'd love to attend all of them, but some of them conflict with my schedule. Will there be a recording of them so I can watch them later?
-
I always pick D since my first name starts with D. Plus, in my total confirmation bias opinion, I tend to find the answers to questions 18-25 on LR to be in the C-E range. But, that's totally anecdotal, and I have other evidence of that. Edit/Add…
-
I'd like to sit in on some of them as well!
-
Ah, this is one of the more infamous LR questions ever. This is a necessary assumption question. The claim that the age of a rattlesnake's age can be calculated from the number of sections on the rattle is wrong. It's wrong because the rattles br…
-
This is a sufficient assumption question. Some people oppose the city's purchase of this thing. Those people oppose the purchase because art critics are debating over whether the thing is actually art. But, the purpose of art is to cause debate. …
-
@gantzerj Thanks. This is one of the rare LSAT arguments that I couldn't figure out what was going on. Even then though, answer B is the only answer choice that talks about a potentially relevant group.
-
Thanks @gantzerj Yeah, the conclusion is different than what I originally believed, so I probably could have eliminated B right off the bat. D would have been left after POE.
-
@lye1001 If you have just scratched the surface like you say, then 7Sage is easy choice in my mind. The Ultimate+ is the best deal value wise on the market.
-
I took both as well (Velocity over the summer of 2014; 7Sage over summer 2015). I'm not going to knock Velocity since it is good and it did help me in certain areas, but 7Sage is a much better option in my opinion (especially for the price). 1.)…
-
@nye8870 Maybe D is not correct due to the difference between "industrial solutions" vs. "solutions thought of by industrialists"? This seems like a pretty trivial distinction to me, though.
-
@nye8870 Thanks! I still am not 100% certain with D though. To me, the passage starts by saying that industrialists "usually" oversimplify things in farming. We then have one example where this is bad (the water retention/drainage thing). But is…
-
@Sheri123 Not quite. I'm referring back to the lessons talked about here: http://classic.7sage.com/lesson/mastery-embedded-conditional/ The necessary condition itself is a conditional statement, so A--->B SOME Not C is a different idea than A…
-
@Sheri123 I missed some parentheses. The conditional should be A--->[Not(B--->C)]. You can distribute the "not" in the necessary condition as B SOME Not C, which gets you A--->(B Some Not C). So if there is an A, then there are some Bs…
-
@JHAldy10 Thanks! Would you say that this is correct? So E's correctness depends on the idea of the logical opposite between approval and not approval. The idea in the passage is that the "majority disapprove." But, all we can say about these peo…
-
@nye8870 I think I just misunderstood what A is actually saying. Is it addressing the whole to part flaw?
-
This is a tough question, and a lot of the difficulty is due to the fact that the damn stimulus is so long/convoluted It's a most strongly supported question, so we don't really need to evaluate the argument (if there is any) in the stimulus. Here…
-
@Alejandro I think there is a lawyers are bad at math joke somewhere in there haha
-
I've certainly not conquered this problem, but I've gotten a lot better at getting rid of answer choice, so I'll give my 2 cents. I think identifying answer choices as out of scope is simplifying it too much. In other words, the correct answer i…
-
I'll take a stab at this one. This is a weaken question. The argument starts with its conclusion: the conventional wisdom that sugar makes hyperactivity worse in kids with ADD is wrong. Why? We have this study about the effects 3 types of sugars…
-
@Pacifico Just did!
-
"Or" rules can be sometimes confusing since the English language is sometimes vague about inclusiveness or exclusiveness. Unless explicitly stated by the LSAT, always assume the inclusive or. 1.) Not run for office----->I shut my mouth. Contap…