Real Practice LSAT with Video Explanations

Explore first game of the June 2007 lsat, where five-digit codes use digits 0–4 exactly once; second digit is twice the first, and the third is less than the fifth.

Analyze how to determine the must be true statement in game 1 by tracing digit positions; the video shows that digit two precedes three in all scenarios, confirming option c.

Analyze two scenarios for the third digit of an acceptable product code when it is not zero, showing that the fourth digit must be zero.

Analyze a logic game with three films read, harvest, and limelight across Thursday to Saturday, where at least one film is shown daily and harvest appears on Thursday.

Analyze a LSAT game to determine seven-week schedule of Guadalupe, Jamaica, Martinique, and Trinidad by applying constraints: Jamaica not in week 4, Trinidad in week 7, and Guadalupe preceding Jamaica.

Analyze game 3 question 12 by applying the no consecutive destinations rule to show why Trinidad cannot be scheduled for week 6, making option a the correct answer.

This lecture analyzes game 3 question 13 from LSAT, examining week five and seven placements of Trinidad, Jamaica, Guadalupe, and Martinique under constraints to identify which scenario could be true.

This video analyzes game 3 question 14 and shows that Martinique must appear in week 6, making freedom makes a voyage to Martinique in week 6 must be true conclusion.

Explore strategies for must-be-true LSAT questions using a hypothetical rearrangement of trips to Guadalupe, Trinidad, Martinique, and Jamaica, building on question 14 to satisfy question 15 conditions.

Analyze game 3 question 16 from real practice LSAT with video explanations, tracing freedom's destinations in weeks three to five and applying rules to deduce week four and five possibilities.

Explore must-be-true deductions in a time-travel logic game, using prior hypotheticals as counterexamples and scanning options to verify Jamaica limits, Guadalupe placements, and Martinique timing.

Analyze a logic game on Rivertown recycling centers, testing conditions across centers to determine which distribution of glass, newsprint, and plastic satisfies all rules.

Explore a Rivertown lsat game where three centers recycle three materials; plastic sits in center three, glass in centers one and two, and newsprint appears everywhere, leaving tin or wood.

From game 4 question 22, identify the material that must be in center two under plastic and glass constraints; newsprint is the correct answer.

Analyzing the final June 2007 LSAT logic game on recycling centers, the lecture derives constraints for centers 1–3 and determines which material lists could be completely inaccurate.

Explore a flawed lsat argument about Labrador retrievers and St. Bernard's, identifying how the author misuses sufficient and necessary conditions and practice selecting the option that mirrors this flaw.

Analyze question 3 as a must-be-true argument completion, using the end of life analogy to show how people look back on the events of the past century.

Analyze how funding bias undermines a report's claim about oxen freeze prepackaged meals and learn to avoid drawing nutritional conclusions from biased evidence.

Analyze a weakening of the scientist's cause-and-effect explanation for 0.5 degree warming, examining evidence about the timing of warming and gas buildup in the atmosphere.

Analyze a flawed LSAT argument about Murray's felony and degrees; identify premises, contrapositive reasoning, and sufficient/necessary condition logic to determine the correct conclusion.

Assess the must-be-true conclusion: even if problems are solved and electric cars are emission-free, charging from nuclear or coal causes environmental damage, potentially worse than proponents believe.

Use double blind techniques whenever possible in scientific experiments to prevent misinterpretations arising from researchers' expectations and opinions.

Examine how keeping a promise and answering truthfully can be mutually exclusive, shown by a scenario where truth-telling breaks a promise, illustrating incompatible duties.

Analyze the real practice lsat question on aluminum can recycling to examine how 50 percent of aluminum recycled relates to the claim that one group contains twice as many cans.

Explore a cause-and-effect LSAT argument about lysozyme in milk heated to 50 degrees Celsius, comparing microwave versus conventional heating and evaluating whether microwaves destroy the enzyme or simply heat unevenly.

Explore the debate over whether a 61 percent claim about information transfer via nonverbal signals is scientifically verifiable, and identify the point at issue between Taylor and Sandra about precision.

The passage exposes a flawed appeal to authority: hospital executives claim confidentiality must be the top priority based on computer experts' views on data threats, overgeneralizing their expertise.

Analyzes a cause-and-effect argument about the land party's 1935 national victory, showing how targeting semi-rural, agricultural and small-business groups amid economic distress shaped support.

Analyze how the argument challenges citywide opposition by showing that 15 opposing votes (less than 1 percent) do not prove the majority view, illustrating methods of reasoning and sample size.

Analyze the flaw of mistaking correlation for cause and effect in the driver's minivan argument. Explain why correlation does not prove causation and identify the correct inference.

Analyzing a reasoning passage shows that poor news media coverage and secretive local political business isolate politicians from electorates, reducing responses to resident participation and discouraging further participation.

Analyze a flawed moral logic argument about actions and aggregate well-being, using sufficient and necessary conditions, contrapositive reasoning, and strengthening premises in LSAT style.

The lecture argues that designer interaction with consumers yields actionable design guidance that survey data cannot provide, explaining why a feature’s rating drops and how to improve it.

Examine the 19th-century French Academy's sponsorship of painting and sculpture and the paradox of innovation. Note that painters produced more unsponsored works because sculpture was more expensive.

Analyze choices that sacrifice sensual comfort for appearances; the correct scenario shows a couple buying an expensive wine to impress dinner guests, sacrificing pleasure for image.

Analyze the paradox in LSAT question 2, where replacing an efficient gas water heater coincides with higher bills, and learn which option does not resolve the discrepancy.

Analyze how the dialogue questions whether biologically replicated DNA fragments create a portrait, testing recognizable resemblance and the concept of a conceptual portrait, and identify the point at issue.

The passage shows Jim Blonsky donating cars to driver education and the community buying cars in support, illustrating that altruistic actions sometimes yield positive consequences for the donor.

The discussion analyzes a debate on moderation: Antonio argues you can live by the middle course, while Marla says moderation must allow spontaneity and occasional risk to seize opportunities.

Explore a flawed advertisement argument about a fabric softener, grounded in a 100-consumer towel test, and highlight the neglect of experience with other brands.

Learn to evaluate Tasmanian tiger arguments by identifying necessary premises and whether a claim strengthens, using negation to test conclusions.

Advertisers boost positive attitudes by linking neutral or negative items to things audiences already like, using pictures rather than prose. This approach helps answer must-be-true questions by illustrating logical completion.

Explore how cognitive psychotherapy targets conscious beliefs and compares its effectiveness to therapies addressing unconscious beliefs and desires, with a focus on argument structure and strengthening questions.

Analyze how open source software aligns with the values of academic scholarship, arguing that universities should use only open source software to support their central mission.

Examine a logic-driven LSAT argument: nations lack moral rights and responsibilities, yet citizens attribute these rights to them for survival, and determine the option that logically completes the argument.

This LSAT question analyzes a back muscle balance argument, showing how a necessary assumption links equally developed muscles on opposite sides to maintaining proper spinal alignment.

Explain a flawed LSAT argument that it is sometimes morally right to obstruct the police, highlighting the jump from premise to subsidiary conclusion and failing to consider overriding moral principles.

The lecture analyzes flawed LSAT argument about government intrusion and taxes, showing promises to provide assistance do not guarantee action in a democracy, and how keeping promises would strengthen it.

Explore grain-to-meat ratios, grain yields, and farmland trends that support the claim meat consumption may soon be morally unacceptable, and how to weaken this argument in an LSAT question.

Evaluate the flaw that political speeches are assumed unreliable because they are selfishly motivated, and that not selfish motives do not guarantee reliability of promises.

Analyze a flawed argument about survival and diverse natural environments and show how Australopithecus afarensis does not disprove the anthropologists' claim.