It took me a bit longer, but I got it right. I almost fell for the trap about it being faster than the competition, but that's not what the advertisement is really saying. It's about being as quick with relief as the competition. Which means it CAN be quicker, but it's also likely to relieve pain at the same rate as the competition.
First attempt I fell for the trap and chose B then did the blind review and located the crucial bit (well crucial in my opinion) "no headache pill stops pain more quickly" and then correctly chose answer choice C
I chose the more attractive answer and got it wrong. BUT the difference is, I saw the negative comparative and considered it as a possibility answer whereas prior to this, I would have crossed it out. Getting this wrong will help me a LOT. I learned my lesson. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!
OMG, man, I knew it as soon as I submitted the wrong answer.
It's a negative comparative that no other brand will relieve pain as quickly. That logically means that either Danaxil is quicker than the other pills or they both relieve pain at the same time, which still justifies that no pill is faster; it's just the same recovery time.
This provides 2 possibilities for the idea of Evelyn and Jane taking their respective pills. Either Evelyn will have her headache cured faster, or her headache pain will not be cured slower than Jane's and at a minimum will be the same time as Jane's. It is either that or faster recovery.
This is why (C) is right. Evelyn (Danaxil patient) having her headache cured as quickly as Jane's is a better choice than (B) as it is a more proper possibility than that it will absolutely be faster. There is a chance that it won't be faster and that the other pill won't fix it quicker than Danaxil, but it may still fix the headache at the same time.
The conclusion of C is that Evelyn's headache being relieved at a minimum as quickly as Jane's shows that even if it's not quicker, it will still be at the same time. As we explored earlier, this is true based on the fact that it's a negative comparative, and it can have 2 possibilities (either the other pill will be slower than Danaxil or it won't be quicker and will just match the same time, i.e., Danaxil won't be beaten but could be matched).
"At least as quick" supports the 2 theories that could be possible while playing it safe with the argument so that it accounts for all possibilities.
I knew as soon as I submitted (B) I was wrong and overlooked the question. Don't sweat it; if you know why you messed up, you're doing pretty well for a level 5 difficulty question!
I wonder, since be is incorrect is that due to there be no support for it being quicker than the competitors headache relief medication? The Ad is simply stating that no headache pill stops pain more quickly.
@NikkolasJacobs B is incorrect because the sentence states that "no headache pill stops pain more quickly(than Danaxil)." This statement says nothing about if other pills work just as quickly, only that other pills do not work quicker. C is correct because at minimum, other pills will work just as fast as Danaxil but not faster.
The reason why I chose C is because this other "leading competitor" is "leading" for a reason. I read the word "leading" as the same as the term "runner-up"; so, 1st Place: Danaxil, 2nd Place: Competitor. Hence, "Evelyn's headache will be relieved at least as quickly as Jane's." So while this Competitor medicine is pretty good, it still does its job just as well as Danaxil.
I got this wrong even after the comparative lessons. Just shows the importance of reading everything to the very last detail. No idea how I'm going to be able to average 1min 24sec each question😢
I was just about to select (B) and get the question wrong until I re-read all of the answer choices and realized my mistake. I read the passage, understood that "no headache pill stops pain more quickly" is a negative comparative, but I still nearly got it wrong. It wasn't until I re-read all of the answers that I realized that while you could conclude (B) (with weak support), (C) was the more accurate and precise conclusion for the passage.
This question is hard because the answer choices use precise language and the trap answer is very attractive, not because the logic is inherently complicated. In fact, I'd imagine a lot of people perfectly understood what the passage was saying and still got it incorrect because (B) is both an early answer choice and reasonably possible answer. They just completely skipped over (C).
What I took away from this experience is to always, always read every single answer choice and to double check that I understand exactly what each answer choice is saying. I should never stop reading just because I think I know the answer.
If you answered B it is a good idea to go back to the previous Foundations lesson "Comparative Language is Versatile"
The question used the phrase "no headache pill stops main more quickly", the confusion arises from not considering the alternative.
While no pill is quicker, that doesn't exclude other pills from being as quick. So other pills could be either 1) as quick, or 2) slower. We only know that no other pill is quicker.
Committing to the claim in B is overreaching.
Lets imagine our elementary school track meet. We might have a race that finishes with a tie for first, Mark and Chris both running the same time.
Now we can say no runner is quicker than Mark.. but that does not mean that no one was as fast as Mark, and we know that Chris ran the same time.
So the only part that must be true, is that Mark will be at least as quick as other runners, we cannot say he ran quicker than all the other runners since there is that one that was also at same speed which is not quicker its equal.
TL;DR: we cannot take the phrase as < or >, since there is the possibility it could be =&< or =&>
39 comments
It took me a bit longer, but I got it right. I almost fell for the trap about it being faster than the competition, but that's not what the advertisement is really saying. It's about being as quick with relief as the competition. Which means it CAN be quicker, but it's also likely to relieve pain at the same rate as the competition.
First attempt I fell for the trap and chose B then did the blind review and located the crucial bit (well crucial in my opinion) "no headache pill stops pain more quickly" and then correctly chose answer choice C
@YouielYiebiyo2030 This comment makes it make so much sense. I just kept thinking no med is faster = the ad's med is the fastest by default.
got it right on the blind review but I had forgotten the possibility of it being just as good or better smh, thankfully remembered after.
I chose the more attractive answer and got it wrong. BUT the difference is, I saw the negative comparative and considered it as a possibility answer whereas prior to this, I would have crossed it out. Getting this wrong will help me a LOT. I learned my lesson. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!
OMG, man, I knew it as soon as I submitted the wrong answer.
It's a negative comparative that no other brand will relieve pain as quickly. That logically means that either Danaxil is quicker than the other pills or they both relieve pain at the same time, which still justifies that no pill is faster; it's just the same recovery time.
This provides 2 possibilities for the idea of Evelyn and Jane taking their respective pills. Either Evelyn will have her headache cured faster, or her headache pain will not be cured slower than Jane's and at a minimum will be the same time as Jane's. It is either that or faster recovery.
This is why (C) is right. Evelyn (Danaxil patient) having her headache cured as quickly as Jane's is a better choice than (B) as it is a more proper possibility than that it will absolutely be faster. There is a chance that it won't be faster and that the other pill won't fix it quicker than Danaxil, but it may still fix the headache at the same time.
The conclusion of C is that Evelyn's headache being relieved at a minimum as quickly as Jane's shows that even if it's not quicker, it will still be at the same time. As we explored earlier, this is true based on the fact that it's a negative comparative, and it can have 2 possibilities (either the other pill will be slower than Danaxil or it won't be quicker and will just match the same time, i.e., Danaxil won't be beaten but could be matched).
"At least as quick" supports the 2 theories that could be possible while playing it safe with the argument so that it accounts for all possibilities.
I knew as soon as I submitted (B) I was wrong and overlooked the question. Don't sweat it; if you know why you messed up, you're doing pretty well for a level 5 difficulty question!
Ugh I have to remember it could also be equal to. Thats key.
0 on actual but 1/1 on blind review.
The stressful thing is that since you don't have much time per question, these types of mistakes can be so easy to make :(
Im a capitalist sheep that fell for danaxil advertising damn you B
@KikeHernándezLuvr Hahahaha
B is so easy to get trapped by ugh
I wonder, since be is incorrect is that due to there be no support for it being quicker than the competitors headache relief medication? The Ad is simply stating that no headache pill stops pain more quickly.
@NikkolasJacobs B is incorrect because the sentence states that "no headache pill stops pain more quickly(than Danaxil)." This statement says nothing about if other pills work just as quickly, only that other pills do not work quicker. C is correct because at minimum, other pills will work just as fast as Danaxil but not faster.
easy money
oh im not hungry.. i got trapped
The reason why I chose C is because this other "leading competitor" is "leading" for a reason. I read the word "leading" as the same as the term "runner-up"; so, 1st Place: Danaxil, 2nd Place: Competitor. Hence, "Evelyn's headache will be relieved at least as quickly as Jane's." So while this Competitor medicine is pretty good, it still does its job just as well as Danaxil.
@JacqN that's smart.
I got this wrong even after the comparative lessons. Just shows the importance of reading everything to the very last detail. No idea how I'm going to be able to average 1min 24sec each question😢
The explanation made me giggle because he said something about falling for the trap answer B. It shows how using the tools they teach actually helps
So awkward because I chose B but was side eyeing the hell out of C, chose B, spirit felt wrong, knew it was C immediately omg guys pls
I got that right, I almost screamed because I've been struggling so hard 😭
no wonder they said properly concluded they mean it don't eliminates any other possibility
He knew most of us picked B lol
I felt soooo confident with B #embarrassment
I was just about to select (B) and get the question wrong until I re-read all of the answer choices and realized my mistake. I read the passage, understood that "no headache pill stops pain more quickly" is a negative comparative, but I still nearly got it wrong. It wasn't until I re-read all of the answers that I realized that while you could conclude (B) (with weak support), (C) was the more accurate and precise conclusion for the passage.
This question is hard because the answer choices use precise language and the trap answer is very attractive, not because the logic is inherently complicated. In fact, I'd imagine a lot of people perfectly understood what the passage was saying and still got it incorrect because (B) is both an early answer choice and reasonably possible answer. They just completely skipped over (C).
What I took away from this experience is to always, always read every single answer choice and to double check that I understand exactly what each answer choice is saying. I should never stop reading just because I think I know the answer.
If you answered B it is a good idea to go back to the previous Foundations lesson "Comparative Language is Versatile"
The question used the phrase "no headache pill stops main more quickly", the confusion arises from not considering the alternative.
While no pill is quicker, that doesn't exclude other pills from being as quick. So other pills could be either 1) as quick, or 2) slower. We only know that no other pill is quicker.
Committing to the claim in B is overreaching.
Lets imagine our elementary school track meet. We might have a race that finishes with a tie for first, Mark and Chris both running the same time.
Now we can say no runner is quicker than Mark.. but that does not mean that no one was as fast as Mark, and we know that Chris ran the same time.
So the only part that must be true, is that Mark will be at least as quick as other runners, we cannot say he ran quicker than all the other runners since there is that one that was also at same speed which is not quicker its equal.
TL;DR: we cannot take the phrase as < or >, since there is the possibility it could be =&< or =&>
Lol they really want to make sure you absolutely want to become a lawyer if you're taking this test