This question would have been a nightmare if I wouldn't have reviewed a similar SA question a few weeks ago, PT 42 S4 Q19 (https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/forums/q19-editorialist-some-people-argue-t864.html). Someone please correct me if I'm wrong (I'll also admit that I only skimmed the posts ab...

I have a problem with answer choice A and another defense for C as the correct answer. It is my understanding that the stimulus presents a cause/effect relationship. One way to weaken this type of relationship is to present another cause for the stated effect. Answer choice A appears to be correct a...

I had another concern about E. I understood that flaw answer choices couldn't introduce new information, that they had to describe a flaw committed in the argument itself. Isn't E introducing new information? I confidently eliminated it for this reason. It seems like strange logic, and if this could...

I eliminated A for the same reason as the above poster... A talks about snacks/popcorn, which we can't assume to be mutually exclusive. Is this a valid reason for eliminating A?

Furthermore: B: Wrong because this is an extremely encompassing statement to make based on the little evidence presented in the reading. What if the two examples of fitness theory actually encompass all of the potential purposes served? Unsupported. C: Wrong for two reasons. It doesn't necessarily u...

Could the stimulus be thought of as a cause/effect relationship? Cause being "differing in tone and vocabulary, and in certain details of the certain world they depict", and the effect being "they are almost certainly not works of the same poet. This would make C correct because it sh...

I was struggling with why B is wrong, and I think I found a very simple answer. Since I'm not a music major, I don't know how the "voice" being mature and "vocal cord" being mature are different or should be considered the same. Nevertheless, considering this question asks for d...

I kept A on my BR, because it sounded OK. But I couldn't disprove D so I chose it. Why is D wrong? Bird fossils were found 20 million years before bird like dinosaurs. The conclusion states that no bird descended form any dinosaur, and we need to find a flaw. Well, what if the evolutionary chain (of...

The correct answer is A. I chose D confidently on both my PT and BR. I identified the correlation in the first sentence, and the implied causation in the conclusion. But I'm confused as to how this should be weakened, if it was a normal C/E relationship I would just show that ~C-->E, C-->~E, e...

One simple way to get rid of (D): The question asks for a way to weaken author's argument against harsh punishment for debtors. So we ought to find a way to say some nice things about punishing debtors. In (d), we can't find anything related to punishment. How can we weaken the author's claim? Acco...

The conclusion talks about the "rabies epidemic"--not specifically the rabies epidemic in raccoons. With this in mind I chose A--because the conclusion does not specify raccoons, if the rabies rate in other animals went up enough the raccoon cases could still go down without affecting the ...

I'm not sure if I'm making this question too complicated. I had originally chosen A, but changed to C at the last minute, which I now understand now is wrong. The argument says one way to identify where a relic has been is by analyzing the pollens that cling to it. When you identify the pollen, you...

In reference to answer choice C, aren't "problematic" and "misguided" essentially the same thing?

Even after reading all of the above, I still don't see how A can be correct, because we don't know how much money the less-skilled workers are making today. All of the above arguments assume that they make less money than the "highly paid skilled workers", and thus that the net salary of a...

I still don't understand how answer choice D provides an explanation for the increase in vitamin A deficiency. If anything, we can only assume that the rate will be the same, because it would be an unwarranted inference to assume that the rate among the rest of the general population has gone up. We...

Oh man. What a stupid problem, you really have to pay attention to the details. Here's how I broke it down: P: Over 90% of the human brain serves no purpose, we know this from the fact that many people with significant brain damage show no discernible adverse effects. C: So once humans begin to tap ...

Still struggling with this question. If I understand correctly, we have to take the professor at his word and use the evidence he presents. He presents a claim that some scientists believe in the first sentence (some scientists claim that SHP where ER fails is a factor in causing BL). The second sen...

After reading the above posts, I'm still having a hard time with this question. The crux of the argument lies in the reasoning that judges should never mitigate punishment on the basis of motives (the previous sentence suggests that there is some other criteria, but we know that it is not motive). W...

I don't understand why E is correct. It states that she is rejecting a possible alternative explanation (that they want water... ok, good so far) for an observed phenomenon (which is what?). IF we assume that the observed phenomenon is that they want sugar, than this makes sense. But that seems to b...

Can someone help me out with an explanation as to why D is incorrect? Here is how I broke down the problem: P: An overwhelming number of industry’s chief executive officers who earn over 250000 annually attended prestigious business schools. C: therefore, Greta Harris, who attended a prestigious bus...