Hi-- I have been prepping for the LSAT for the past 4-5 months or so and have seen significant improvement in all the sections--except RC! SO frustrated. I'm taking the LSAT this Saturday and I'm running out of ideas. I am never able to make it to the 4th passage, and much of the time I am unable to...

Yes, definitely! Thanks. On main point questions, I often eliminate those that I deem unsupported first so that's why I eliminated C but I understand what you're saying and it definitely explains why C is correct and A is not.

Yes, that clears it up. The author never implies that any country's standard of living must be reduced, he does imply that implementing an ideal industrial ecosystem would have positive benefits in regards to natural resources and environmental issues (pollution, excess wastes, etc.). It can reasona...

Are we supposed to infer that the author feels the high standard of living can be maintained if an ideal industrial ecosystem? I didn't see that he expressly stated that anywhere. In paragraph 1 he says that ideally, all would enjoy standards of living equivalent, but unless something is done this i...

I chose the correct answer (A) on this question, but could someone reiterate why D is incorrect? My mind's just blanking and I wanted to make sure I had a clear reason for eliminating D. Thanks!

When I did this passage, I had trouble deciding between A and E. I was hesitant to pick A because it didn't include anything about cotton. The cultivation of rice was so intriguing because it was done in an economy dedicated to maximizing cotton. Specifically lines 18-21 was what made me want to cho...

So for this main point questions, I eliminated C because it said the finding could someday be extended to a complete solution of the dark matter problem and I think that is way too strong and unsupported. The last paragraph says that the discoveries regarding neutrinos may add to our understanding. ...

I also narrowed it down to B and D! My reasoning behind eliminating D was that the relationship between specialized farms and urban populations is not a causal one. If you read the blurb, it doesn't suggest that an urban population caused specialized farms or that specialized farms caused urban popu...

How should we decide on a game like this with relative ordering and conditionals, whether framing is a good idea? I never can decide! For example: 52/2 Game 3 (a bread truck makes exactly one delivery...) 51/4 Game 3 (a courier delivers exactly eight parcels....) When should we take these conditiona...

I think the key in this argument is that happiness requires love and friendship as primary motives (so without these, happiness is not possible) but economic needs do NOT require love and friendship as primary motives (so without these, economic utility can be possible) I think you confused the logi...

I had problems with this game because I couldn't figure out how to set it up best. Rules 4, 5, and 6 also confused me. How do they work specifically?

Hey! When doing this question I was down to B and C as well. My reasoning for C was similar to yours. Since it's an inference question you want the answer that can be PROVEN by the passage. B is too strong to be proven--it could be true but it is not without a doubt true. Think--what if someone is s...

My issue with this question is this-- the author never makes any indication that although solar electrical systems didnt work in Brazil, they can be implmented profitably in many countries--my main cause for eliminating it was the fact that it was so strong--that they CAN be implemented in MANY coun...

The key on this question is to focus on the underlying structure each person's argument and how they relate. Jordan: One of two things will happen - A or B. If A --negative consequence, but if B--negative consequence Terry: Proposes a solution/resolves Jordan's argument by addressing how either A or...

Hey-- I think the main point you're confusing is the passage says "all TOO MANY weaklings are also cowards" it doesn't mean that ALL weaklings are cowards, just that many are (which can also be "some" in LSAT language) weaklings=A cowards=B fools=C so some/many A's are B's, and m...

Yes! Thank you for clearing that up!

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. This is how I looked at it.. Jay argues that Helena's conclusion is wrong because some children adopted by extroverts remain introverted no matter the age at adoption. We can tell that he thinks she's saying that biological factors play absolutely no role in a c...

Does this question feature a required assumption or a bridging the gap assumption? I chose the correct answer, but when doing the question had trouble deciding between A, B, and D. A because the conclusion says Hartley was dishoneset in not acknowledging the intellectual debt owed to Lawrence---so i...

I understand why "E" must be correct, but what I don't understand is why the correct answer choice is saying almost exactly what the first statement of the passage says. When doing must be true deduction/inference questions, I'm so used to having to figure something out based on relating/c...

So then..

(I did high to low)
Mg-->MgPgSg
Mt-->OtStMt
Pt-->KtOtPt

Is this right?
How does number 15 work?
If O, S, K, and M all play tennis, how do you know what Kim is ranked? Why is she higher than Maricella?