LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Francis O'Rourke
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 471
  • Joined: Mar 10, 2017
Hi Mike,

I'm not sure if I agree with the diagram of the second sentence. You may infer that an explanation requires an accurate description, but the speaker is not trying to make this claim. Rather, the speaker is stating that if you had sufficient knowledge, you could give an accurate explanation of the causes of an action.

For that reason, I'm not sure how you can derive R--->E--->AD from the final sentence. This interpretation seems to make the final sentence a lot more complicated than intended. I would agree with Ron above that the correct and simplest way to read this statement is rational → justification (reasons for the action) essential part of explanation.

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.