The negate test helped me. basically negate the answer choice if the negated answer choice hurts the augurment it's right... (i hope i'm saying it right)
is answer choice A a sufficient assumption? because it's guarantees the conclusion + makes the argument stronger (because of the set reasoning in the provided explanation)
@bro I think A is preying on those (like myself) who didn't register a key modifier in the premise.
"each of the wild large mammals that seemed worth domesticating" lets us know that "each" is not required in the argument in the way that A is framing it (every mammal). Instead, the premise frames "each" as:
each mammal that seemed worth domesticating.
It is implied that people didn't try to domesticate everything, just everything that seemed worth it.
Got it right but had to re read like three times until I was able to make sense of it. Ahhhhh. At least the anxiety of working threw these is slowly fading feeling more comfortable with the questions.
The zoologist is essentially just taking a concept from thousands of years ago and trying to apply it to today's world (i.e. people tried doing this thing back then and it was hard, so people trying to do the thing today would have a hard time too).
My eyes darted immediately to the AC that described this gap, so all I had to do to check myself by negating it.
A dreadfull and pedantic question. Been sitting here for 45 minutes and still dont understand the logic. Solution is vastly unsatisfying. 0/10. Moving on.
@jrm98 Honestly, the only thing that's helped me improve a bit is to read the answer choices super slowly and negate them. So for this one's answer, I read :
"it is not much easier today to domesticate wild large mammal species than it was in the past"
As:
"It is much easier today to domesticate wild large mammal species than it was in the past."
Then I applied it to the argument. If you take the negation to be true, the argument's just not possible.
But yeah, I'm thinking unless I learn to do these quicker, I'll just skip and leave to the end on test day, guess if I have to, and focus on the ones I know I can do right and in good time.
Heres how I understand A to be wrong even though I picked it:
A wrong because the premises jump from people in the past to people today. The jump and the continuity in B is the assumption that the argument requires. If its not easier for people today than it was thousands of years ago to domesticate then it explains why the conclusion is that undomesitcated animals are either difficult or not worth it.
A sounds really good and is super helpful for the argument but if it werent true it wouldnt change anything the argument is saying
I feel incredibly stumped not because I got the answer wrong, because I am simply not able to learn from my mistakes. My only takeaway from learning what the correct answer is that the video's interpretation of the stimulus is so far from what I assumed. Why would "Since those days" ever mean that its in the past. "Since those days", inclusive of every day from thousands of years ago, to today. So from that thinking don't understand why B would need to be necessary? This isn't grammar, this isn't confusing necessary and sufficient - it seems to me that it is simply a matter of interpretation.
@CMas Even though he suggested against this because of time constraints, what helps me is finding the answer I believe is correct then negating it. This allows me to see if that AC would destroy the argument or not. If negated answer makes the argument fall apart, chances are its the right answer.
This def isn't full proof but I've found success when I took the time to do that. Once you get a grasp of that, then you can watch videos (Kevin Li's are great) that help you understand the patterns of these questions so it can help your speed.
Good luck! Im not sure if this will work but this is what I'm doing because I'm also struggling with this question type. Practice, practice, practice!!!!
@AlvinB I thought of it like this: If domesticating animals is much easier today, then many species that were "too hard" before might be domesticated now, weakening the conclusion that "most wild large mammal species in existence today either would be difficult to domesticate or would not be worth domesticating." For NA questions if you negate an answer choice and it destroys the argument, that is the necessary assumption. If domesticating animals are easier today, then it cannot be true that most wild large mammal species today would be difficult to domesticate.
162 comments
The negate test helped me. basically negate the answer choice if the negated answer choice hurts the augurment it's right... (i hope i'm saying it right)
is answer choice A a sufficient assumption? because it's guarantees the conclusion + makes the argument stronger (because of the set reasoning in the provided explanation)
@bro I think A is preying on those (like myself) who didn't register a key modifier in the premise.
"each of the wild large mammals that seemed worth domesticating" lets us know that "each" is not required in the argument in the way that A is framing it (every mammal). Instead, the premise frames "each" as:
each mammal that seemed worth domesticating.
It is implied that people didn't try to domesticate everything, just everything that seemed worth it.
The last two I got correct on blind review. I'm getting close....
got one right and i almost cried huge dub
@SydneyRoper knew i was desperate for a win when my eyes started watering
how would the negation of d look like?
I read every answer and thought they were all unecessary smh
@SusanLeifker me tooo lolll
Got it right but had to re read like three times until I was able to make sense of it. Ahhhhh. At least the anxiety of working threw these is slowly fading feeling more comfortable with the questions.
Was breezing thru these sections till I got to NA. Literally haven't gotten a single one correct ffs
Drop the confetti. I finally got one of the harder ones right.
This is the hardest question I've done so far I'm ngl
The zoologist is essentially just taking a concept from thousands of years ago and trying to apply it to today's world (i.e. people tried doing this thing back then and it was hard, so people trying to do the thing today would have a hard time too).
My eyes darted immediately to the AC that described this gap, so all I had to do to check myself by negating it.
Damn I dont get it
@TeklaCo same
yeah this one wrecked me
A dreadfull and pedantic question. Been sitting here for 45 minutes and still dont understand the logic. Solution is vastly unsatisfying. 0/10. Moving on.
Man I read b in correctly totally missed the not :(
Prediction it must have gotten harder lol but then I was like guess they didn’t supply an answer choice like that.
Not recognizing the modifier of "that seemed worth domesticating" is what made me choose A off rip instead of B.
Half of these answer choices felt necessary to the argument...
@MRod completely agree
i have gotten every single one in this section wrong. it is not clicking
@jrm98 Honestly, the only thing that's helped me improve a bit is to read the answer choices super slowly and negate them. So for this one's answer, I read :
"it is not much easier today to domesticate wild large mammal species than it was in the past"
As:
"It is much easier today to domesticate wild large mammal species than it was in the past."
Then I applied it to the argument. If you take the negation to be true, the argument's just not possible.
But yeah, I'm thinking unless I learn to do these quicker, I'll just skip and leave to the end on test day, guess if I have to, and focus on the ones I know I can do right and in good time.
Heres how I understand A to be wrong even though I picked it:
A wrong because the premises jump from people in the past to people today. The jump and the continuity in B is the assumption that the argument requires. If its not easier for people today than it was thousands of years ago to domesticate then it explains why the conclusion is that undomesitcated animals are either difficult or not worth it.
A sounds really good and is super helpful for the argument but if it werent true it wouldnt change anything the argument is saying
I keep getting them right in the BR and I'll take it tbh
@ggasca21 Best way to learn. Eventually it'll click during your actual attempt :)
I feel incredibly stumped not because I got the answer wrong, because I am simply not able to learn from my mistakes. My only takeaway from learning what the correct answer is that the video's interpretation of the stimulus is so far from what I assumed. Why would "Since those days" ever mean that its in the past. "Since those days", inclusive of every day from thousands of years ago, to today. So from that thinking don't understand why B would need to be necessary? This isn't grammar, this isn't confusing necessary and sufficient - it seems to me that it is simply a matter of interpretation.
@EvangelaGabeau I feel like we have too many practice questions and for a lot of them the answers reasons are made up
There has to be a better strategy than just looking at the stimulus/conclusion and asking yourself "what's necessary."
It would be increadibly more helpful if we had a stategy that wasn't just asking ourselves what the question is asking.
@CMas Even though he suggested against this because of time constraints, what helps me is finding the answer I believe is correct then negating it. This allows me to see if that AC would destroy the argument or not. If negated answer makes the argument fall apart, chances are its the right answer.
This def isn't full proof but I've found success when I took the time to do that. Once you get a grasp of that, then you can watch videos (Kevin Li's are great) that help you understand the patterns of these questions so it can help your speed.
Good luck! Im not sure if this will work but this is what I'm doing because I'm also struggling with this question type. Practice, practice, practice!!!!
I actually suck at these, but I somehow got the last two questions right just because I turned off my brain?! Idek how to explain it.
@Nicoled Right I feel like I don't understand because I don't know how I got it right or exactly how the other questions are that wrong.
Someone please explain to me why B works.
@AlvinB I thought of it like this: If domesticating animals is much easier today, then many species that were "too hard" before might be domesticated now, weakening the conclusion that "most wild large mammal species in existence today either would be difficult to domesticate or would not be worth domesticating." For NA questions if you negate an answer choice and it destroys the argument, that is the necessary assumption. If domesticating animals are easier today, then it cannot be true that most wild large mammal species today would be difficult to domesticate.