What tripped me up so hard and took me forever was trying to break down what every answer choice was saying. at one point i was like theres no way im reading english rn
I picked C. The way I interpreted it was very similar to what B was saying. An effect (back pain) that occurs in the absence of a particular phenomenon (slipped disk) might not occur when that phenomenon is present. In other words: back pain may not occur when a slipped disk is present. To me, it was a very hard choice between B and C, because the way I interpreted it seemed to say almost the same thing to me.
where I am having trouble is in figuring out where the sufficiency indicator is on the stimulus.
I have noticed that on questions such as MC, strengthen/weaken, and even this section that I perform much better than the SA/NA sections. These questions feel more like comprehension of the argument and the answers. Maybe that concept is just not yet clicking for me with NA/SA
Replacing the words with "a factor" with bulging and slipped disks and "certain effect" with back pain really helped understanding the answer choices easier which allowed me to get it correct
I don't know if it's just me but the way he explains why the ACs are wrong just confuse me even more. Instead of creating another argument in a totally different setting, can't he just simply state, without overcomplicating, why the AC does not fit this particular argument? By the end of the explanations, I still don't understand why I got the answer wrong or how the other ACs weren't right for this argument. Might just be me though since english isn't my first language.
Is anyone else having trouble understanding the wording of this stimulus?
These individuals said they had never experienced serious back pain..."since these individuals with b/sd evidently felt no pain from them"?? HUH? I was stuck on this part because no serious back pain=no pain at all and that is taken to be true.
"These conditions could not lead to serious back pain in people who do experience such pain". A cannot lead to B in people who have B?
Maybe I'm just tired but I watched the video a few times and I still don't understand. I got the question right but I don't know how since I did not fully understand the stimulus.
This is the first question I have got right in the past few. I first tried poe and narrowed to a/b then I added the language in as is suggested in the video. A simply did not seem to match the argument and B revealed the flaw.
I interpreted it as, just because those that did have slipped disks/bulging disks & did not experience pain does not mean those who are experiencing back pain is not a result of the same issues the individuals are experiencing (bulging disks/slipped disks).
161 comments
Wow I really have to slow down on these in order to get them correct. I've had to go way over on time. Hopefully it becomes more intuitive for me.
I was so torn between A & B, but I settled on A.
Facepalm.
i second guessed myself 🥲
A's explanation made no sense to me. It was contradicting the definition of sufficiency.
If:
Finding -> Pain
It follows that
/(finding + /pain)
If findings is sufficient for pain, it follows that it is not the case that one can have finding and no pain.
wtf
If i get questions like these on the exam, I'm leaving it till the end because wtf. I did POE and got it right somehow.
Answer choice A and B sound exactly the same in my head. Still can not decipher one from the other.
@Edbnapa I think A would work if these conditions COULD lead to back pain. So if the conclusion of the passage was opposite.
What tripped me up so hard and took me forever was trying to break down what every answer choice was saying. at one point i was like theres no way im reading english rn
@jrm98 "there's no way I'm reading English rn" has been my thought so many times throughout this process
@jrm98 LITERALLY SAME.
I picked C. The way I interpreted it was very similar to what B was saying. An effect (back pain) that occurs in the absence of a particular phenomenon (slipped disk) might not occur when that phenomenon is present. In other words: back pain may not occur when a slipped disk is present. To me, it was a very hard choice between B and C, because the way I interpreted it seemed to say almost the same thing to me.
where I am having trouble is in figuring out where the sufficiency indicator is on the stimulus.
@KDLaw78 I had this exact same thought process
As if I got it right lmao
OH MY GOD I GOT IT
Got it right but wth
Aight im taking a break lol
I have noticed that on questions such as MC, strengthen/weaken, and even this section that I perform much better than the SA/NA sections. These questions feel more like comprehension of the argument and the answers. Maybe that concept is just not yet clicking for me with NA/SA
Replacing the words with "a factor" with bulging and slipped disks and "certain effect" with back pain really helped understanding the answer choices easier which allowed me to get it correct
@GavinMartin17 Totally agree
I don't know if it's just me but the way he explains why the ACs are wrong just confuse me even more. Instead of creating another argument in a totally different setting, can't he just simply state, without overcomplicating, why the AC does not fit this particular argument? By the end of the explanations, I still don't understand why I got the answer wrong or how the other ACs weren't right for this argument. Might just be me though since english isn't my first language.
pin abstract concept in answer choice to the specific concept in stimulus
ex: factor (bulging or slipped disks in spine) and produce effect (back pain)
@bcn honestly, this is the most helpful way for me to make sense of these abstract answer choices.
Is anyone else having trouble understanding the wording of this stimulus?
These individuals said they had never experienced serious back pain..."since these individuals with b/sd evidently felt no pain from them"?? HUH? I was stuck on this part because no serious back pain=no pain at all and that is taken to be true.
"These conditions could not lead to serious back pain in people who do experience such pain". A cannot lead to B in people who have B?
Maybe I'm just tired but I watched the video a few times and I still don't understand. I got the question right but I don't know how since I did not fully understand the stimulus.
When you think b is the trap but it's really the right answer :(:(:(
Wow I can't believe I got this one right
i must be stupid bc i did not get this like yall in the comments...
@mzughaerr Don't worry about it. People feel more inclined to share about things they are successful at, kind of similar to social media.
@mzughaerr I got several wrong before this one. Do not be discouraged.
This is the first question I have got right in the past few. I first tried poe and narrowed to a/b then I added the language in as is suggested in the video. A simply did not seem to match the argument and B revealed the flaw.
I interpreted it as, just because those that did have slipped disks/bulging disks & did not experience pain does not mean those who are experiencing back pain is not a result of the same issues the individuals are experiencing (bulging disks/slipped disks).
got it correct but in 3.5 minutes lol
Let me put the translations here so maybe someone can see the answer better:
“A factor”: a slipped or bulging disk
“Effect/ certain effect”: back pain
“A phenomenon”: the absence of a slipped or bulging disk
“A characteristic”: no back pain despite a slipped or bulging disk
Once I started putting these in for the abstract terms in my mind, everything started to click so much better.