This is a classic case of a synthesis question that requires us to pull from multiple sources. The phrase "mass market manipulation" doesn't appear in the passage, but we are told that advertising has "manipulative and hegemonic power" (line 4). Then in lines 10-11, we see that t...

There's no easy answer to that question, but here are a few guidelines: *The strength of the statements we're inferring from drives the strength of our inferences. If we have absolutes or conditionals or other strong statements in our source material, then we may be able to make an extreme inference...

@LizS111 Feel free to start a new thread for any questions that haven't been addressed yet. I put up an official explanation for #25. I hope it helps! Let me know if you have any questions about it.

Question Type: Inference Stimulus Breakdown: Staying submerged longer correlates with diving deeper. From here on out, we can simplify things by treating these as the same, since the answers don't ask us to consider any other facors. We also know that D lasts longer than FS, and ES lasts longer tha...

As much as possible, I try to predict what is needed from an answer. The rule tells us that K can't be nominated for councillor. Notice that it's about what cannot happen, not what must. We need to prevent K from being in C, but we don't need to know that K is in, and this rule doesn't seem to affec...

Regarding the explanation for (D): would you say that premise boosters in inference questions are typically wrong? If this were an inference question, then we wouldn't be likely to think of one part of the stimulus as "premise" and another as "conclusion." On inference questions...

B isn't wrong--it's the only one that *can* be true. It's possible in Frame 1. For instance, if SS and LL are both in Mon/Tue, then we can start one of PP and RR on Wednesday and the other on Thursday, leaving just one workshop running on Friday, like this:

M: S L
T: S L
W: P
Th: P R
F: R

The main consideration for framing is whether we have a clear divide with notable consequences. In other words, what rule or division would we frame? In this game, we only have three rules. The first one allows us to infer that Y only has one element. The second gives us a couple of anti-chunks, but...

Generally, a colon means that whatever follows is equivalent to, or an example of, what came before. So if I make an assertion followed by a colon, whatever comes next should clarify what I mean or why I thought so. He is very stingy: he wouldn't even give his mother a dime. The day was unproductive...

I think you meant to ask about PrepTest 24. You can see the discussion here and ask for follow-up as needed: https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/foru ... t4162.html

Hi Angela! These early Must Be True questions can be tricky, but often they are nudging us to find an inference that will help elsewhere. Fortunately for you, you found that K can go in March, and I think that helped since 16 and 17 are could be true questions, but November is the placement that abs...

That's right. The computer display is using data and simulation to attempt to re-create what already happened and show jurors what it might have looked like. This is fairly different from predicting whether a future event will happen, or even from trying to model a future event in detail. Meanwhile,...

This question ties into the central issue at the heart of the passage: is Weiner right that the use of video erases indigenous identity by forcing a Western worldview onto those who use it? Turner says no--the Kayapo are able to create videos of their ceremonies that "mirror" and "con...

The digital LSAT definitely adds a different kind of challenge now that we can't mark the physical test. We have some suggested annotation strategies on our blog. https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/blog/digital-lsat-tips-and-strategies-an-ultimate-guide/ However, I wouldn't try too hard to hold the ...

Yes, you absolutely want to prephrase whenever possible. On synthesis or application questions like this, it can be tough to identify the right answer without prephrasing, since we may have an unclear idea of the task that leaves us vulnerable to trap answers.

The trick here is one they'll pull out again and again: throw a term that is definitely mentioned in a relevant way, but doesn't answer the precise question that was asked. Patent law grabs our attention because it was mentioned twice, but the first mention is to say that patent law generally does n...

B is a reversal of what we know. The stimulus implies that the hypotheses of physical science can be verified (phys sci --> verifiable), while B says that only the hypotheses of physical science can be verified (verifiable --> phys sci). It's the difference between "My students are human&...

Yes, we definitely want to take the answers as given, as well. Note that the question stem itself says "Each of the following, if true . . . " That's standard wording for these, as for Strengthen, Weaken, and others. As for the content of A, I can see how an answer about wind would make us...

Yeah, this is a doozy indeed! The trick is to identify really clearly what they want out of us, or we may find ourselves looking at all 5 choices without much sense of a difference. Looking back at the context, the "stone-hard facts" are one part of a Biblical reference: turning stone to b...

This is good work! I'd add that B and D both rely on the idea that some people are not aware of their surroundings at all. We have no idea whether this is the case. We've just been given cases in which people's awareness rises or falls. Whether someone is ever completely unaware, or whether certain ...