Why can we eliminate D as an answer choice? I thought that "likelihood and magnitude of an eventual loss covered by insurance policy" was a fairly good match for "lawyer's risk of financial loss" (line 9). More generally, I like to reference other parts of the passage in reaching...

I was between B and D on this question, but upon thorough review, it it clear why D is the correct answer. Waller is essentially arguing that if ESP is real, then the general public would believe that it is real. Chin is saying that because there are skeptic and it is impossible to convince all skep...

Can someone please further elaborate why (D) is wrong?

I was similarly tempted by answer choice (C), but what was really sticking out to me about it is its use of the word "well". I don't know if I agree that the author's purpose was to say that medical textbooks are not well suited for use in court, but rather that custom illustrations are be...

Can someone please further elaborate on why (D) is incorrect? Here is how I interpreted it: what is true of each members of the group = the 2 sub-conclusions which are "inconsistent with each other" is also true of the group as a whole = because the 2 sub-conclusions were inconsistent with...

Tricky question indeed! Here're we're asked to infer what the author would agree with about the archaeological record. So I don't head into a tailspin, what do I generally know the author thinks about the archaeological record? He/she thinks that it doesn't prove a theory in this case because some ...

I chose correctly by eliminating the bad ones, but I don't get get the correct answer. Can we translate "personally" to "partially idiosyncratic"? Doesn't seem right. I think it's much easier to see why this answer is correct in context. At first, I was similarly confused becaus...

We have something of a chain with this question-- Government policy (A) led to increased demand (B), which led to increase in price (C). We then get the conclusion that the government is responsible for the increased price (D). With these sort of causal chains on necessary assumption questions, whic...

I knew that the correct answer was (E), but I didn't have a good reason for eliminating (B). I think it comes down to it being an ambiguous answer choice--it doesn't clearly weaken or strengthen. Depending on how you look at it, it can perform either function. As a strengthener, it casts on the driv...

Revisiting this question after a period of time, I think I understand it (though I'd love confirmation/feedback). A lesson I have come to learn is that you need to stick close to the text in RC. So, since this question is asking us to weaken the author's argument against harsh punishment for debtors...

In a sense, couldn't you say that (A) is actually weakening in that it provides an alternative cause for the predicted effect given in the conclusion? The stimulus says: Acidic pollution decreased --> Expected decrease in negative environmental effects of acid rain. If you then give another reaso...

I chose A, because I connected lines 9-14 with lines 40-42. The zoning laws are there because there is car traffic, and they result in a separation between communal/residential areas. If then, the city structure is changed so as to accommodate communal + residential areas together, then don't the zo...

Aren't "some" statement flexible? Can't the conclusion be read both as "some CC are ~LP" and also as "some ~LP are CC"? When you reverse the order of the conclusion to "~LP some CC," it matches the structure of the stimulus. I went with C because it did not r...

I was confident in B. In general, if the LSAT claims that X --> Y, then does that not mean that the argument is assuming Y could have resulted only from X? That is why I thought B is correct. Because our income is high (because X) , our concert series does not lack popular appeal (then Y) . From ...

(E) (Notation Key: LP = liberal party, FO = in favor of ordinance, CC = city council) LP some FO CC ---> ~FO ======= CC some ~LP This is not a valid argument. The conclusion should have been LP some ~CC. Close but not quite! I hope this helps... If anyone sees something else, I'd love to hear it....

Can someone elaborate on why (C) is incorrect? The way I see it, if one evaluates the effect of taking the garlic tablet for less than 4 months and the same result is not yielded (beneficial effects are reduced), that weakens the conclusion, no?

Would (D) be correct had it omitted the "at most"? I rationalized that because it says at most 40,000, then that could mean anywhere from 0-40,000---that doesn't really give you much to work with. However, if it said 40,000 documents had permanent seals, then that is a different story beca...

I didn't pick C because it says "we can NEVER be completely sure ..." rather than simply saying "we can NOT be completely sure ..." How do we get the support for "never?" How do we know because we cannot verify computer-dependent proofs NOW we cannot do it in the futur...

Does this argument assume meaning of poem <--> what reader believes? I wanted to diagram this argument formally, and I had trouble doing so but I predicted that the answer choice would be Reader believes --> Meaning (though the reverse of this was the correct answer). Because there is a con...

Could you rule out (C) because it does not explicate that the invisible sculptures have no shape or dimension of their own until second glance by the viewer (lines 53-55)? I ruled it out for this reason, because the answer choice did not make clear that eventually viewers see the sculptures' "p...