Analogy questions

Dave,

I'm preparing for the October LSAT, and have been reworking a lot of old tests, especially RC passages as those were my downfall in June (-9 for a 166). I'm doing much better, although I worry that might be due to extreme familiarity with the passages and remembering LR stimuli too well since I've done some of these like 5 or 6 times. I'm completely out of fresh material as I used it all for June, and have been scoring 175-180 on almost every retake since. Any thoughts on this?

Anyway, I'm mostly just struggling with analogy questions in RC. So, I think if you could walk me through your thought process on several that I just did today, and particularly emphasizing the key concept I should have abstracted so I could compare them to my own, that would help tremendously.

PT30S4:
I was looking for something that expressed this:
Q5: Recycling one thing and using it for something else
Q18: Unified, unfragmented (yet distinct from nature??? this one tripped me up big time)
Q27: Hard data, introspective report=irrelevant
Q28: Two competing theories lacking common framework by which to judge each other (was between B and E, but determined historical data is more like a text than eyewitness accounts. Am I on the right track with that?)
PT31 S3
Q24: Extension of self, preserve, symoblic act

PT61 S1:
Q10: embarassment after finding out one's wrong
Q23: incorporated elements outside of national boundaries
Q27: one sided approach--this approach is best (glorification) and should shape other things (historical force) (This one was ungodly challenging, was b/w B and C)-- this one was by far the hardest for me

So, how should I go about refining my approach? I have also noticed that when two reasons are given for something like glorification AND historical force, or extension of self AND political act, both are likely to be expressed in the correct answer (are they ever not?). Does this hold as a general rule?

Thank you, Dave!