That does help -- the example you gave is something that I was worried about and clarifies things for me. Thanks!

Hi, I was thrown off by A's use of the phrase 'inadequate argument'. For LR questions in general, my understanding was that an argument is invalid only if there is something wrong with its logical structure. We don't consider the truth values of the premises of the argument in making this evaluation...

Hi, I wanted to double check something about the logic. If James legitimately had the chair's endorsement, then we know that the draft proposal the chair saw included all the recommendations James presented to the committee. However, if James did not legitimately have the chair's endorsement, then i...

This is getting nitpicky, but one reason why A seems bad to me is that it talks about the preceding paragraph s , which in particular includes the first paragraph. The first paragraph mentions rhetorical factors, so I think the intended understanding is any 'general explanation' must be different th...

The conclusion referenced that 80 percent of the area's cropland is now irrigated. Earlier in the final paragraph the author mentions that the Chinese settlers brought with them specialized skills in irrigation systems. Choice C confirms that irrigation has brought benefits (fertile soil) to agribus...

I do think that C is the best answer available, but I was really thrown off by the fact that C has one object (Sarah) failing multiple times in the past, leading one to conclude that she will fail again in this upcoming attempt. The provided example cites several other attempts by different objects ...

Ok I think I that makes sense (also, you're right that the question I cited uses 'or' not 'and', hopefully this doesn't throw off anyone who reads this) -- it seems like the word 'AND' has less precedence than the subject in the first half of the sentence, so the reading He would have avoided leavin...

I spent 15 minutes looking at this question. Here's what I think is going on. There are two ways for something to be unnatural: 1) violate law of nature 2) be a statistical anomaly Then the dude philosopher says "it's impossible for one to violate the laws of nature". -Here is where I got...

Can someone tell me the reason why the LSAT test writers would want to use the term 'coronary disease' in the first sentence, and then 'heart disease' in the second sentence, when it seems like they're being used to refer to the same thing? The only effect I see is that they've introduced the potent...

Hi, suppose we had the following sentence: "If John was early, he would have avoided leaving behind X and Y." Does this mean that if John was early, then what is left behind does not include X and does not include Y. Or does it mean that what is left behind cannot include BOTH X and Y, but...

I have a question about deriving certain inferences. In one of the games from the LG study guide (for reference, it's on pg 498 of the third edition) there is the following rule: "There will be no opening act at the concert immediately following the concert at which F plays." Looking at th...

If in a LSAT passage I see the statement: 'Person A is at higher risk of contracting heart disease than Person B.' is that equivalent to: 'Person A is more likely to contract heart disease than Person B.' or are there in fact differences? I've seen both words used frequently and I don't think I've e...

Why not C? Bump. Wondering this as well. C is wrong because it is possible that all the planning committee (PC) members with a significant financial interest (SFI), as well as all non PC members with a SFI do not work in the suburbs. We're only given that some PC members work in the suburbs, so it'...

Hi, could someone explain why C is wrong? I was drawn to it because of lines 26-34, which says that mainstream U.S. historiography was 'firmly rooted in a nationalist approach', something that I would paraphrase as 'most U.S. historians tried to make the history of the U.S. seem more glorious than i...

Thanks for the response!

Thanks for the response -- that definitely helps. I guess I'll have to improve my ability of judging whether a potential answers adds enough plausibility to be a good candidate for the correct answer.

Hi everyone, thank you for the helpful responses. Method 3 of strengthening causal arguments is something helpful that I'll have to keep in mind, and D now does look too far-fetched to me. Having said that, I have a much stronger preference for the example ohthatpatrick gave with medication and blur...

Putting the answer choices aside for a moment, the researcher's reasoning struck me as flawed when I read it because she hasn't provided any evidence of a casual relationship between eating the tropical fruits (maybe having atypical Parkinson's causes one to have cravings for the tropical fruit -- w...

Could someone explain why A is wrong? The main problem I see with it is the phrase 'wide array.' The passage only provided the applications to oil flow and global weather pattern prediction, which doesn't seem like rather narrow applications. An earlier post said that the 'supercomputers cannot solv...

Hi Tommy, that definitely clears things up. Thanks!