so tricky that the lsat writer set the number "300" as "300", and the number 400 is appeared to be "four hundred"

I think B is also incorrect because of the "were on the whole responsible for", which is unsupported and way too strong.

Why is A wrong?

so the key to crack this question is the word "primarily"

P1: Poor definition of "tradition" raises legal issues P2: Popular view of "tradition", point out 2 example cases P3: Regulation history against hunting of sea otters P4: 2 Example cases Scale: 1. FWS & district court of case 1 > clothing made from sea otter pelts should n...

is C correct because of the word "personal"?
I chose D
Would appreciate for some explanation for thie question
Thanks in advance

Regarding answer choice B, I struggled to look back in the passage trying to find the word "synthetic". I remembered seeing it, but I don't remember where, or even in which paragraph was it mentioned. I know Q2 should be located back to paragraph 4 so I primarily searched in P4. But I did ...

I have a different thought on why E is wrong. In the premise, it is said that grape fruit juice seems to affect the absorbtion of "certain" medicine. I suppose we can take that to mean "some" medicine. In AC E, it is said that doctor suggest patient who took "certain" m...

Suppose we have 100 mails in total, including: 1. correctly addressed: 55 Not damaged 49 + damaged in transit 6 2. incorrectly addressed: 45 so we have 49 mails arrived within 2 days, and 45+6=51 mails arrived more than 2 days. does this match the scenario in the question stem? how to define "a...

I think C is irrelevant too. we are not talking about "the science grant money available"

Hi, could another potential flaw be that not enough vinegar was added to the baking soda? the premises say that fizzing didn't occur when SOME of the liquid was added to the powder, meaning that they could have only added one drop, which isn't enough to produce a fizzing reaction. No, I think how m...

Here's my two cents: if you prefer to use the diagraming method, it would be something like this: P: praising/blaming --> know a lot C: we must reject: Know a lot --> action not freely performed. Linking up the two conditionals gives you: Praising/blaming --> know a lot --> action not f...

let me give my 2 cents here we should bear in mind the conclusion is about whether people have a genetic predisposition to link facial expression with basic emotion. A. we don't care about the accuracy of people's answer in the study. even if everyone in the study wrongly link a happy face with sad ...

(C) We don't know Glen's opinion on danger.


I think Glen does not express her opinion on "allowing government to decide what constitutes virtuous behavious among citizens"

anyone agree or disgree?

regarding answer choice D, someone thinks Glen would agree, but what I think is Glen says nothing about government overprotection. can we make an inference from "a concern with personal rights that leads to the individual's indifference to society's welfare" to "government's being ove...

The conclusion of this argument is that the company treats its employees fairly. Why? Because those retirees who responded to a survey said they had been treated fairly. The issue I see, and that (D) hinges upon, is that we don't know about the folks that didn't respond. What if triple the number o...

Hi, could someone explain what "A is the evidence/mark of B" means? I think it will feel better if it means no A --- no B, so B --- A. or it can be understand as A ---B and B---A ? Thanks in advance. Let's try to make it straightforward with an analogy. Consider we are in a party, and we ...

Analogy： Translator of poetry --- Violinist Original language of the poetry --- Piano Translated language of the poetry --- Violin word-for-word equivalents --- sound translation --- music and the stimulus is making an argument like this: violin can play the same music as piano ---> violinist (tr...

Just wanted to write down my thought process for this question. I have picked the wrong anwer choice D, however, when I reviewed this question and the stimulus, I found that I did not notice the shift appeared in Raghnall's argument, which is attacked by the author. Raghnall's argument: money is the...

The question asks us to identify a conclusion for which the statements offer the most support. We know the following: D is also wrong because it states 200,000 years and less than one fifth. 200,000 is one fifth of a million so it could not be less than one fifth. If it was less than one quarter, i...