#feedback I think focusing on the word "only" being too strong in answer A is the better way to eliminate it.
"Many of these hot spots are vulnerable to habitat loss due to commercial development." implies that some hot spots are not vulnerable to habitat loss due to commercial development.
If we aren't bringing in outside knowledge then this is all that we know threatens hot spot habitats. So species in hot spot habitats are not a true subset of "those who are threatened with extinction because of habitat loss" because, again, some are not, the circles merely overlap rather than one being subsumed by the other.
This leads to inefficiency if you concentrate resources on hot spot habitats (answer B) since some don't necessarily need protection, which we trying to avoid due to limited resources. It would be different if answer B read "concentrate their resources on protecting vulnerable hot spot habitats".
This makes answer A sound better because you wont be wasting of the resources on any species that isn't "threatened with extinction", better serving the goal of preserving species.
The problem with answer A is with the word "only" because it might sometimes be a more efficient use of resources to help species threatened with extinction due to reasons other than habitat loss. Stopping drag net fishing in the Caribbean could save more species per resources spent than stopping logging in the Amazon.
Would love some thoughts on this. I might be overthinking the whole thing.
I realize drag net fishing might not be the best example because it also damages habitats, but I was thinking more of the amount of non-commercial species/bycatch caught and killed by the nets.
I picked my answer and didn't pay attention to any other ones. So when I went to the video, answer F: kill all pandas, made my jaw drop. Was not ready for that 😂
Something that I'm working on not doing is "reading intensely." I feel like it burns my stamina out. Instead I'm building my intuition and confidence in the form of the questions and answer choices. One foot in front of the other...
I got B, but A was a hard no for me because of the word 'ONLY.'
The video says A isn't 'precise enough,' but isn't 'ONLY' also just way too percise? The paragraph says it’s reasonable to push for certain animals, but it doesn't say we have to exclude every other species. To me, 'only' made it an automatic fail. Is that a valid way to kill the answer or am I reachin
I've surprisingly been getting these questions correct, which makes me feel confident, but I really have to work on my time. Most of the time I go 40 seconds to 2 minutes over depending on the question.
I have a quick question. I was between A and B, and I picked B but chose it because it mentioned "hot spots" and "hot spots" seemed pretty integral to the stimulus, and A didn't say hot spots. Is this a bad way of trying to find the correct answers? I feel like I'm making a best guess based on word choice, but I can't articulate why one answer is correct (vs. the second-best answer.) I just have no idea how to solve these faster in the allotted time frame lol
I don't think so, since answer choice A mentions "habitats" and hot spots are a kind of habitat. Personally, I decided against A because of the word "only," which is really strong. I hope this helps!
My strategy was the same. In the last lesson, he mentioned the 'strength' of the words matching ('noise may impair hearing' matches 'engine noises can impair hearing'). So I ruled out A because 'only' is a strong word and it didn't seem as though any of the support claims backed that up with similar strength. My thought was like, "well ok, they may have enough resources to give priority to endemic species and still raise some awareness about other endangered species, so 'only' seems too narrow and unsupported".
Long story short- matching the strength of the words in the support claims to the conclusion has helped me eliminate conclusions that the support wouldn't be strong enough for. (i.e. Engine noises may cause hearing loss doesn't give strong enough support to "engine noise definitely impairs the whales' ability to communicate")
Hopefully that wasn't too much word vomit and is actually helpful. Obviously, don't take this as always true- it's def over/under conclusive at times.
Wow i'm going to be a great lawyer 😁 It really helps to read the passage and understand it. Then Predict what the correct answer be. Then look at the choices.
92 comments
#feedback These lessons are great but it would be beneficial to see how he solves these questions within the target time.
I chose F.. Kinda confused as to how it was wrong?
I really thought kill all the pandas was correct
tough luck!
the word "concentrate" is what showed me it was the right answer. Since the sentence began with "limited".
Absolutely, studying drawing links between words chosen in the stimulus and answer choice really helps me to find the answer choice as well
#feedback I think focusing on the word "only" being too strong in answer A is the better way to eliminate it.
"Many of these hot spots are vulnerable to habitat loss due to commercial development." implies that some hot spots are not vulnerable to habitat loss due to commercial development.
If we aren't bringing in outside knowledge then this is all that we know threatens hot spot habitats. So species in hot spot habitats are not a true subset of "those who are threatened with extinction because of habitat loss" because, again, some are not, the circles merely overlap rather than one being subsumed by the other.
This leads to inefficiency if you concentrate resources on hot spot habitats (answer B) since some don't necessarily need protection, which we trying to avoid due to limited resources. It would be different if answer B read "concentrate their resources on protecting vulnerable hot spot habitats".
This makes answer A sound better because you wont be wasting of the resources on any species that isn't "threatened with extinction", better serving the goal of preserving species.
The problem with answer A is with the word "only" because it might sometimes be a more efficient use of resources to help species threatened with extinction due to reasons other than habitat loss. Stopping drag net fishing in the Caribbean could save more species per resources spent than stopping logging in the Amazon.
Would love some thoughts on this. I might be overthinking the whole thing.
yes 100% this is how my brain sorted the answers correctly
I realize drag net fishing might not be the best example because it also damages habitats, but I was thinking more of the amount of non-commercial species/bycatch caught and killed by the nets.
I think you are right in that absolutes like the word only are typically dangerous unless we are talking a completely valid argument.
The kill all the pandas part had me laughing lol. I like how sometimes the humor could be a nice element of this intense curriculum
The obvious answer is to kill all the pandas lmao
foundations lessons are paying off :)
got it right, but still feel iffy on it, a little confusing :/
Yay! Celebrating baby steps.
Not kill all the pandas! 😭
kill all the pandas threw me so off guard
Taking your time + Writing it out on scratch paper = Eureka
I side with answer F
Lol me too😂
I picked my answer and didn't pay attention to any other ones. So when I went to the video, answer F: kill all pandas, made my jaw drop. Was not ready for that 😂
Should I be concerned that I didn't notice choice (F) until he read it? My jaw literally dropped.
it wasn't on the picture
i did not notice there was an f until i saw this comment
Something that I'm working on not doing is "reading intensely." I feel like it burns my stamina out. Instead I'm building my intuition and confidence in the form of the questions and answer choices. One foot in front of the other...
@Nampoina yes!!
I got B, but A was a hard no for me because of the word 'ONLY.'
The video says A isn't 'precise enough,' but isn't 'ONLY' also just way too percise? The paragraph says it’s reasonable to push for certain animals, but it doesn't say we have to exclude every other species. To me, 'only' made it an automatic fail. Is that a valid way to kill the answer or am I reachin
LETS GO HUGE W
I've surprisingly been getting these questions correct, which makes me feel confident, but I really have to work on my time. Most of the time I go 40 seconds to 2 minutes over depending on the question.
@aidamaeee04 same i'm worried I am becoming over confident lol
@EthanPerlmutter Literally same!
Choice A opinion: If one is endemic, they face habitat loss; but not all habitat loss are endemic.
got it right on BR ugh
@TOMCRUISE me too!
#help
I have a quick question. I was between A and B, and I picked B but chose it because it mentioned "hot spots" and "hot spots" seemed pretty integral to the stimulus, and A didn't say hot spots. Is this a bad way of trying to find the correct answers? I feel like I'm making a best guess based on word choice, but I can't articulate why one answer is correct (vs. the second-best answer.) I just have no idea how to solve these faster in the allotted time frame lol
I don't think so, since answer choice A mentions "habitats" and hot spots are a kind of habitat. Personally, I decided against A because of the word "only," which is really strong. I hope this helps!
My strategy was the same. In the last lesson, he mentioned the 'strength' of the words matching ('noise may impair hearing' matches 'engine noises can impair hearing'). So I ruled out A because 'only' is a strong word and it didn't seem as though any of the support claims backed that up with similar strength. My thought was like, "well ok, they may have enough resources to give priority to endemic species and still raise some awareness about other endangered species, so 'only' seems too narrow and unsupported".
Long story short- matching the strength of the words in the support claims to the conclusion has helped me eliminate conclusions that the support wouldn't be strong enough for. (i.e. Engine noises may cause hearing loss doesn't give strong enough support to "engine noise definitely impairs the whales' ability to communicate")
Hopefully that wasn't too much word vomit and is actually helpful. Obviously, don't take this as always true- it's def over/under conclusive at times.
Right in 36 secs - compared to where i started, this is so awesome!
Wow i'm going to be a great lawyer 😁 It really helps to read the passage and understand it. Then Predict what the correct answer be. Then look at the choices.