I skimmed the stem and then tried to guesstimate which one could be the answer choice. I was looking for something that had a looser wording and, lo an behold, it was A. Wording for all the other answer choices were too extreme: future tense, the only etc.
@isabellagirjikian The argument is saying that a component is preferable to semiconductors only if all other features of said component are as good as the semiconductor, and if its heat tolerance is better than the semiconductor. Those two sufficient conditions must be true in order for the component to be preferable to semiconductors. In the case of vacuum tubes, they only meet one of those two conditions, being that they have a higher heat resistance. Because vacuum tubes do not meet both conditions, then they are not preferable to semiconductors, which is what AC-A says. I hope this helps!
I've come to realize that for most must be true statements, the answers will be weak. For instance, answer choices B-E have phrases such as "will be, the only reason, will always, the only advantage". Those phrases are too strong.
@KhushyMandania Although I agree with this in general, I feel like there is some confirmation bias here too. In this case, answer choice A is no less definitive in its wording than answer choice B. In fact, answer choice B utilizes "some" in its reference to digital circuits, whereas A simply refers to all digital circuits. Just something to take note of.
@LiaWang I think that's when you look at B's wording with future tense "Once...will". The scope of the stem is only constricted to the present not what will happen. It never goes to mention what should happen in the future. That's why B also does not hold up through a primary lens.
@Isra I think you are misunderstanding my comment. I was responding to the other comment's observation that the wrong answers are worded too strongly. I was pointing out that the right answer is worded just as strongly in this specific question and that AC B might even be less strongly worded.
But HOW do we know that the conditional rule applies to ALL vacuum tubes when not ALL vacuums meet the sufficient condition to trigger the rule?
And I don't see how the final sentence applies to SEVT when they are a unique set with their own quirks: I understand the while superset / subset thing, but I think that tool makes it a little confusing here.
Not sure why J.Y. is confused and hung up on A not specifying SE vacuum compared to vacuum tubes in general. The statement that matters here is the one that says "vacuum tubes' maximum current capacity is presently not comparable"
This the condition that makes A the correct answer, and as you can see, it is not specifying SE vacuum tubes. It is stating that ALL vacuum tubes are not currently comparable..... There is no mistake and no elaborate assumption here
@epayne17 Agreed. Additionally, the last sentence of the stim states only "vacuum tubes." I didn't feel as though it was a leap to state just vacuum tubes in the answers.
Regardless, I gather the point J.Y. makes here is to exercise pragmatism when surveying the answers. Compare the other answer choices against your suspected correct answer to clarify if your hunch is correct.
Quick tip: when practicing MSS and MBT questions, I tell myself “I don’t know” if I can’t reasonably "get" what the question is asking from the stimulus alone. Treat the stimulus like a law or a set of facts that defines a new reality. Once you accept that reality and stop having outside assumptions, many answer choices eliminate themselves and the correct one becomes much more obvious.
@Taylor345 I'm glad you said that you mapped it out this way because I did the exact same, which lead me to selecting A. I wish the video covered this option because I'm not confident that it's correct, but it sounds like we both got to the correct answer. While it does say 'only if', which usually indicates a necessary condition, I think the key here is that it says 'BUT only if that component were ALSO comparable'. To me that the use of 'but' and 'also' indicate that it's presenting another sufficient condition that must be met in order for something to be considered 'preferrable.' I read it as 'but only if that component were also comparable to semiconductors in all other significant respects'...... it would be preferrable (implied, but not explicitly stated). I don't think it's saying 'Any A is B, but only if A is also C'. I think it's saying 'if A has B and C then it's D'. Again, not sure if that's correct, but I think the way this one is worded is different than some of the other examples.
i got this right but the explanation is so long and confusing? i just said our rule is "preferable for use in digital circuits --> component comparable --> component also comparable to SCs" and then the VC max CC is not comparable to SCs, so it fails the necessary condition
I do not see the difficulty that J.Y. indicates in the video. Small vacuum tubes are a subset of all vacuum tubes. If no vacuum tubes allow the capacity of electrical current that is necessary to make them preferred, then the necessary condition fails, game over answer A. Perhaps J.Y. misread "current" capacity as "heat capacity at present."?
#help Is it important, at this point in learning, to get the questions correct in the time they expect me to get?
I'm having a hard time doing the question within the timeframe while using Lawgic. If I use Lawgic my confidence in finding the answer skyrockets, but I take twice the recommended time :(
@EshaZaveri Ignore the time it takes you to figure out the answer right now. Once you get the methodology down and you genuinely know how to solve the problems, then start to work on timing. Trying to figure it out in the 1.5 minutes right from the get go is so so hard. I was doing the same, but didn't become successful until I slowed down.
I went above the timeline, more than double, and it was suggested to me to review on BR (figured I got my actual take wrong picking A, but stuck with my answer after re-reading the other options and got it right). This will be a mouthful, but here's how I went about it (feel free to correct if I am mistaken):
A = Small experimental vacuum tubes
B = Operating in heat
C = Semiconductors components fail
D = Component's comparable to semiconductors in all other categories (like max capacity)
E = Resistance to heat greater to semiconductors
F = Preferable to use in digital circuits
First sentence we can construct: A --> B --> C. OK.
Second sentence: D AND E --> F, and the reasoning is as follows:
Any component whose resistance to heat is great to that of semiconductors (E) would be preferable for use in digital circuits (F) [so here we have E --> F], but only if that component (from E) is also comparable to semiconductors in all other categories (like max capacity) (i.e. D); this means that E --> F only if D also happens, hence D AND E --> F).
Taking the contrapositive of both:
/C --> /B --> /A } Semiconductor components don't fail --> DOES NOT operate in heat --> IS NOT Small experimental vacuum tubes. OK.
/F --> /E OR /D. } What does this mean?
NOT preferable to use in digital circuits --> (NOT resistance to heat greater to semiconductors OR Component's NOT comparable to semiconductors in all other categories (like max capacity)). OK.
Last sentence says that Vacuum tubes' maximum current capacity is presently not comparable to that of semiconductors. So this is /D. What can we draw from /D (based on what I described)? That if F is false (i.e. /F), then at least one of E or D is False (i.e. either /E or /D) [It’s not that /F causes either /E or /D; it’s that if /F is true, at least one of /E or /D must be true, meaning that knowing we have /F leads us to know we for sure have either /E or /D].
Option A (in the Answer) tells us that "Vacuum tubes are not now preferable to semiconductors for use in digital circuits" = this is /F that I mentioned. That said, we don't know whether /E occurs (i.e. whether the component DOES NOT have resistance to heat greater to semiconductors), so we can't conclude /E or E.
Knowing that it is /F --> /E or /D, you can tell that based on the last sentence of the stimulus (i.e. /D), and Option (A) [of the answers] giving you /F, that based on this chain, Option A is the right answer.
@Oasis323 I used 26:33 minutes to write the stimulus down in my notebook, drew pictures, and accompanying logic symbols (letters). Then I looked at the answers and found the right one quickly. Now, obvs not going to do this in the real test, but like you're doing, I'm breaking it down and forcing myself to learn how to break down stimuli and to be able to make it second nature. Great job!
I was glad to see lots of other comments. This question actually seemed really straight forward to me but maybe I'm looking at it wrong?
I simplified the logic as:
If (Greater heat resistance) AND (comparable) then preferable
And we are told that although some vacuum tubes meet the first half of the sufficient condition (Greater heat resistance), all vacuum tubes fail the second required condition (comparable).
As a result of failing the full sufficient condition, it is insufficient to trigger the necessary condition. In other words, even if a vacuum tube has greater heat resistance, none of them are comparable, therefore none of them are preferrable.
I feel like it would've been easier to chalk it up to something like this:
preferred -> comparable
Contrapositive: /comparable -> /preferred.
I spent much longer on this question than I think I should have and I wasn't even really thinking of Lawgic or this theoretical approach when I narrowed it down to A), but it makes so much sense in my head.
I came here to disagree with the video like so many of you have. However, did you read the text?
Here is the text explanation:
There’s one more sentence in the stimulus.
However, vacuum tubes’ maximum current capacity is presently not comparable to that of semiconductors.
The third sentence tells us that all vacuum tubes do not currently have maximum current capacity comparable to semiconductors. So, SEVTs fail the necessary condition, and therefore SEVTs must not be preferable.
That is the explanation we were looking for in the video that was initially missed by J.Y. It was explained in the text following the video. Obviously, the video needs to be updated, but at least it's there in the text explanation.
Did anyone else base their answer on the "not now preferable" and "presently not comparable" parts of this argument? I follow the VT and SEVT distinctions just fine, and during review, I can understand, but I was having some trouble during the actual drill because I thought that those two made a connection. Do you think this follows logically?
No I think it's cuz at the end it says "[all] vacuum tubes' maximum current capacity is presently not comparable to that of semi-conductors," and that disqualifies all vacuum tubes regardless of whether their resistance to heat is greater.
@osaieh I don't understand why he was so hung up on heat resistance when the stimulus clearly states that the vacuum tubes do not meet the maximum current capacity requirements. I agree with what you said.
What on earth am I missing here? How can he completely ignore the max current capacity.
If it's a cat, it's an animal. Not an animal, not a cat.
If it's not comparable, it's not preferable.
Again, what am I missing?
#feedback
#tutor
#important
#explanation
#instructor
#help
Edit:
This is explained in the text explanation following the video explanation:
There’s one more sentence in the stimulus.
However, vacuum tubes’ maximum current capacity is presently not comparable to that of semiconductors.
The third sentence tells us that all vacuum tubes do not currently have maximum current capacity comparable to semiconductors. So, SEVTs fail the necessary condition, and therefore SEVTs must not be preferable.
Eventually a new video needs to be made, but at least the explanation is included in the text. I feel better now! lol
You can throw away the heat resistance, all that matters is that vacuum tubes don't have comparable max current capacity and that immediately disqualifies them for digital circuits. Easy point.
Got this one right on the first attempt! Slowing down helped me a lot. E was tempting because it was my "ideal answer," but learning not to choose the ideal answer with the right one.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
172 comments
I tried doing an experiment-
I skimmed the stem and then tried to guesstimate which one could be the answer choice. I was looking for something that had a looser wording and, lo an behold, it was A. Wording for all the other answer choices were too extreme: future tense, the only etc.
Got so lucky! yey
This was so confusing omg
Can someone help break this down more simply? I feel the video just makes it more confusing to understand. Thanks!
@isabellagirjikian The argument is saying that a component is preferable to semiconductors only if all other features of said component are as good as the semiconductor, and if its heat tolerance is better than the semiconductor. Those two sufficient conditions must be true in order for the component to be preferable to semiconductors. In the case of vacuum tubes, they only meet one of those two conditions, being that they have a higher heat resistance. Because vacuum tubes do not meet both conditions, then they are not preferable to semiconductors, which is what AC-A says. I hope this helps!
@EDobbs24 Thank you, it does!
not hard to chain. It was mostly "How do we know that?"
I've come to realize that for most must be true statements, the answers will be weak. For instance, answer choices B-E have phrases such as "will be, the only reason, will always, the only advantage". Those phrases are too strong.
@KhushyMandania Although I agree with this in general, I feel like there is some confirmation bias here too. In this case, answer choice A is no less definitive in its wording than answer choice B. In fact, answer choice B utilizes "some" in its reference to digital circuits, whereas A simply refers to all digital circuits. Just something to take note of.
@LiaWang I think that's when you look at B's wording with future tense "Once...will". The scope of the stem is only constricted to the present not what will happen. It never goes to mention what should happen in the future. That's why B also does not hold up through a primary lens.
@Isra I think you are misunderstanding my comment. I was responding to the other comment's observation that the wrong answers are worded too strongly. I was pointing out that the right answer is worded just as strongly in this specific question and that AC B might even be less strongly worded.
But HOW do we know that the conditional rule applies to ALL vacuum tubes when not ALL vacuums meet the sufficient condition to trigger the rule?
And I don't see how the final sentence applies to SEVT when they are a unique set with their own quirks: I understand the while superset / subset thing, but I think that tool makes it a little confusing here.
Not sure why J.Y. is confused and hung up on A not specifying SE vacuum compared to vacuum tubes in general. The statement that matters here is the one that says "vacuum tubes' maximum current capacity is presently not comparable"
This the condition that makes A the correct answer, and as you can see, it is not specifying SE vacuum tubes. It is stating that ALL vacuum tubes are not currently comparable..... There is no mistake and no elaborate assumption here
@epayne17 Agreed. Additionally, the last sentence of the stim states only "vacuum tubes." I didn't feel as though it was a leap to state just vacuum tubes in the answers.
Regardless, I gather the point J.Y. makes here is to exercise pragmatism when surveying the answers. Compare the other answer choices against your suspected correct answer to clarify if your hunch is correct.
Another one correct LET'S GO
Quick tip: when practicing MSS and MBT questions, I tell myself “I don’t know” if I can’t reasonably "get" what the question is asking from the stimulus alone. Treat the stimulus like a law or a set of facts that defines a new reality. Once you accept that reality and stop having outside assumptions, many answer choices eliminate themselves and the correct one becomes much more obvious.
I'm not sure if I mapped this out correctly, but this is how I did it and came to the correct answer.
Greater Heat resistance AND Comparable to Semi -> Preferable
The final sentence of the stimulus references "Vacuums", not just "small experimental vacuums".
Meaning that all vacuums fail to meet the sufficient condition and are therefore not preferable.
EDIT: Can someone help clarify this for me?
I read the sentence "Any component...preferable in digital circuits... but only if...." as
"Any A is B, but only if A is also C"
Does this translate into
A and C -> B
or
B -> A and C
@Taylor345 I'm glad you said that you mapped it out this way because I did the exact same, which lead me to selecting A. I wish the video covered this option because I'm not confident that it's correct, but it sounds like we both got to the correct answer. While it does say 'only if', which usually indicates a necessary condition, I think the key here is that it says 'BUT only if that component were ALSO comparable'. To me that the use of 'but' and 'also' indicate that it's presenting another sufficient condition that must be met in order for something to be considered 'preferrable.' I read it as 'but only if that component were also comparable to semiconductors in all other significant respects'...... it would be preferrable (implied, but not explicitly stated). I don't think it's saying 'Any A is B, but only if A is also C'. I think it's saying 'if A has B and C then it's D'. Again, not sure if that's correct, but I think the way this one is worded is different than some of the other examples.
i got this right but the explanation is so long and confusing? i just said our rule is "preferable for use in digital circuits --> component comparable --> component also comparable to SCs" and then the VC max CC is not comparable to SCs, so it fails the necessary condition
I got this wrong and was so lost because I missed the word "not" in AC A and interpreted it as a contradiction.
@EmeryBeals Me also. It is going in my wrong answer journal.
I do not see the difficulty that J.Y. indicates in the video. Small vacuum tubes are a subset of all vacuum tubes. If no vacuum tubes allow the capacity of electrical current that is necessary to make them preferred, then the necessary condition fails, game over answer A. Perhaps J.Y. misread "current" capacity as "heat capacity at present."?
#help Is it important, at this point in learning, to get the questions correct in the time they expect me to get?
I'm having a hard time doing the question within the timeframe while using Lawgic. If I use Lawgic my confidence in finding the answer skyrockets, but I take twice the recommended time :(
@EshaZaveri Ignore the time it takes you to figure out the answer right now. Once you get the methodology down and you genuinely know how to solve the problems, then start to work on timing. Trying to figure it out in the 1.5 minutes right from the get go is so so hard. I was doing the same, but didn't become successful until I slowed down.
I went above the timeline, more than double, and it was suggested to me to review on BR (figured I got my actual take wrong picking A, but stuck with my answer after re-reading the other options and got it right). This will be a mouthful, but here's how I went about it (feel free to correct if I am mistaken):
A = Small experimental vacuum tubes
B = Operating in heat
C = Semiconductors components fail
D = Component's comparable to semiconductors in all other categories (like max capacity)
E = Resistance to heat greater to semiconductors
F = Preferable to use in digital circuits
First sentence we can construct: A --> B --> C. OK.
Second sentence: D AND E --> F, and the reasoning is as follows:
Any component whose resistance to heat is great to that of semiconductors (E) would be preferable for use in digital circuits (F) [so here we have E --> F], but only if that component (from E) is also comparable to semiconductors in all other categories (like max capacity) (i.e. D); this means that E --> F only if D also happens, hence D AND E --> F).
Taking the contrapositive of both:
/C --> /B --> /A } Semiconductor components don't fail --> DOES NOT operate in heat --> IS NOT Small experimental vacuum tubes. OK.
/F --> /E OR /D. } What does this mean?
NOT preferable to use in digital circuits --> (NOT resistance to heat greater to semiconductors OR Component's NOT comparable to semiconductors in all other categories (like max capacity)). OK.
Last sentence says that Vacuum tubes' maximum current capacity is presently not comparable to that of semiconductors. So this is /D. What can we draw from /D (based on what I described)? That if F is false (i.e. /F), then at least one of E or D is False (i.e. either /E or /D) [It’s not that /F causes either /E or /D; it’s that if /F is true, at least one of /E or /D must be true, meaning that knowing we have /F leads us to know we for sure have either /E or /D].
Option A (in the Answer) tells us that "Vacuum tubes are not now preferable to semiconductors for use in digital circuits" = this is /F that I mentioned. That said, we don't know whether /E occurs (i.e. whether the component DOES NOT have resistance to heat greater to semiconductors), so we can't conclude /E or E.
Knowing that it is /F --> /E or /D, you can tell that based on the last sentence of the stimulus (i.e. /D), and Option (A) [of the answers] giving you /F, that based on this chain, Option A is the right answer.
@Oasis323 I used 26:33 minutes to write the stimulus down in my notebook, drew pictures, and accompanying logic symbols (letters). Then I looked at the answers and found the right one quickly. Now, obvs not going to do this in the real test, but like you're doing, I'm breaking it down and forcing myself to learn how to break down stimuli and to be able to make it second nature. Great job!
Once I re-read the stim probably 20 times and got over the girl math I was doing in my head to make sense of the content, I got the question right :)
@daisylul and thats real asf
I was glad to see lots of other comments. This question actually seemed really straight forward to me but maybe I'm looking at it wrong?
I simplified the logic as:
If (Greater heat resistance) AND (comparable) then preferable
And we are told that although some vacuum tubes meet the first half of the sufficient condition (Greater heat resistance), all vacuum tubes fail the second required condition (comparable).
As a result of failing the full sufficient condition, it is insufficient to trigger the necessary condition. In other words, even if a vacuum tube has greater heat resistance, none of them are comparable, therefore none of them are preferrable.
I feel like it would've been easier to chalk it up to something like this:
preferred -> comparable
Contrapositive: /comparable -> /preferred.
I spent much longer on this question than I think I should have and I wasn't even really thinking of Lawgic or this theoretical approach when I narrowed it down to A), but it makes so much sense in my head.
I came here to disagree with the video like so many of you have. However, did you read the text?
Here is the text explanation:
There’s one more sentence in the stimulus.
However, vacuum tubes’ maximum current capacity is presently not comparable to that of semiconductors.
The third sentence tells us that all vacuum tubes do not currently have maximum current capacity comparable to semiconductors. So, SEVTs fail the necessary condition, and therefore SEVTs must not be preferable.
That is the explanation we were looking for in the video that was initially missed by J.Y. It was explained in the text following the video. Obviously, the video needs to be updated, but at least it's there in the text explanation.
Hopefully this helps.
bro this question rocked my shit for a minute, i literally crossed out all 5 answers and then went back to and realized I was overcomplicating things.
@TheBigFatPanda you are most definitely not alone
im so cooked i suck at these MBT questions bro
@mzughaerr they're kind of rare, i feel like i usually only see one per section so i wouldn't worry too much ;)
Did anyone else base their answer on the "not now preferable" and "presently not comparable" parts of this argument? I follow the VT and SEVT distinctions just fine, and during review, I can understand, but I was having some trouble during the actual drill because I thought that those two made a connection. Do you think this follows logically?
No I think it's cuz at the end it says "[all] vacuum tubes' maximum current capacity is presently not comparable to that of semi-conductors," and that disqualifies all vacuum tubes regardless of whether their resistance to heat is greater.
@osaieh EXACTLYYY came here to comment this!! :) i completely agree
@osaieh I don't understand why he was so hung up on heat resistance when the stimulus clearly states that the vacuum tubes do not meet the maximum current capacity requirements. I agree with what you said.
What on earth am I missing here? How can he completely ignore the max current capacity.
If it's a cat, it's an animal. Not an animal, not a cat.
If it's not comparable, it's not preferable.
Again, what am I missing?
#feedback
#tutor
#important
#explanation
#instructor
#help
Edit:
This is explained in the text explanation following the video explanation:
There’s one more sentence in the stimulus.
However, vacuum tubes’ maximum current capacity is presently not comparable to that of semiconductors.
The third sentence tells us that all vacuum tubes do not currently have maximum current capacity comparable to semiconductors. So, SEVTs fail the necessary condition, and therefore SEVTs must not be preferable.
Eventually a new video needs to be made, but at least the explanation is included in the text. I feel better now! lol
You can throw away the heat resistance, all that matters is that vacuum tubes don't have comparable max current capacity and that immediately disqualifies them for digital circuits. Easy point.
Got this one in under a minute!
Got this one right on the first attempt! Slowing down helped me a lot. E was tempting because it was my "ideal answer," but learning not to choose the ideal answer with the right one.