Subscription pricing
How do you practice flex three sections？ thanks!
PT Questions
1595628403
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
1595628403
Edited Wednesday, Sep 10
After revisiting the CC, I thought the "except" in this stimulus is a bi-conditional indicator.
https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/except/
From the last sentence, we know that ppl do not defer to journalists except when they have no direct experience.
The logic goes:
If they have direct experience, they don't defer to journalists. DE--->DJ (they don't defer to journalists, so economics reports won't have any impact---correct answer D)
If ppl don't have direct experience, they defer to journalists. DE--->DJ
My explanation for (B): if "direct experience every day" is equivalent to "everyday experience", then we can conclude: ppl will defer to journalists on foreign policy. But (B) is wrong because we cannot assume deferring to journalists implies that those pessimistic reports will have negative impacts.
In the stimulus, economic reports are likely to have impacts because it may cause ppl to lose confidence, but we know nothing about how foreign policy reports would have impacts. The subject matter is different.
1595628403
Saturday, Sep 21 2019
Good luck!
1595628403
Friday, Sep 20 2019
P: modern literature’s sympathetic treatment of such protagonists suggests to readers that they should be unconcerned about contributing to societal good
C: modern literature can damage individuals who appropriate this attitude and damage society
gap: “suggest to readers” and “damage individuals”… they are not the same group of people. there is a huge gap
1595628403
Friday, Sep 20 2019
P: heavy salting of A began 20 years ago and A area’s groundwater contains 100 milligrams of salt per liter.
nearby area where little salt is used only contains 10 milligrams of salt per liter.
water that contains 250 milligrams of salt tastes unacceptably salty.
C: continuing salting will cause groundwater unpalatable within the next few decades.
flaw: the argument compared two area’s groundwater (phenomenon) and gave an explanation (salting to melt ice caused the water to contain more salt). maybe salting is not the real reason.
A: safe to drink ≠ palatable
B: obviously not the right AC
C: irrelevant
D: yes. so salting is not the cause. before salting, the area already contained a large amount of salt and only increased 10 milligrams of salt in 20 years. so it probably won’t reach 250 milligrams.
E: irrelevant. the conclusion is about continuing salting, we don’t care about decreasing salting. right AC has to prove that continuing salting will not cause groundwater unpalatable.
1595628403
Wednesday, Jan 20 2021
@ yes, my order was lewis, employment, sprawl, hedges. first two are not bad. sprawl and hedges are hard. Do you find the last game hard? I ran out of time on that last question, wish I could have 1min more
1595628403
Tuesday, Jan 19 2021
just finished! I agree RC was hard. anyone plans to take April test?
1595628403
Thursday, Sep 19 2019
principle: if no overwhelming evidence that performing one’s duty will have disastrous consequence, one should fulfill that duty.
right AC
no evidence➡️fulfill
no fulfill➡️evidence
pay attention to invalid argument forms
1595628403
Thursday, Sep 19 2019
P: research shows that managers who use self-deprecating humor in front of their employees are viewed more positively
C: the career advice suggesting employees emphasizing strengths and downplaying weaknesses is incorrect
gap/flaw: confuses two different groups of people / shift in the subject
1595628403
Thursday, Sep 19 2019
NA: we have to choose AC that must be true if conclusion is true
this is argument by analogy because the author emphasize that physicians’ work is life-or-death as power plant operators
not indispensable means not essential
A: right AC. if physicians can cut down their working hours then A must be true, physicians' work is not that essential or indispensable. A minimizes the gap between jeopardizing lives and life-or-death
B: this is a strengthen question answer. strengthens the analogs part. but it does’t have to be true
C: how does physician perform the work is irrelevant. it strengthens the argument a little bit by saying that working too long is bad
D: people don’t have such jobs are irrelevant
E: some physicians opinion is irrelevant
For NA questions I found that generally right AC don’t contain new information/subjects which doesn’t appear in the stimulus. such as DE
1595628403
Thursday, Sep 19 2019
Stimulus: instinctual and non-instinctual behaviors
non-instinctual (flexible) behaviors need fewer brain neurons
insects don’t have enough brain neurons for flexible behaviors
Inference: insects cannot have non-instinctual behaviors
A: we don’t know about elaborate brain mechanism
B: yes. right AC. insects can only have instinctual behaviors
C: “larger than insects' brain” may not be enough for non-instinctual behaviors
D: “large brains” wrong, stimulus said a large number of neurons. also, this is not sufficient condition for flexible behavior
1595628403
Thursday, Sep 19 2019
P: artificial is better than natural fields because of fewer injuries and less cost of maintenance
C: they chose natural fields
gap/right AC: prove that natural is better in other more important ways
I chose B in PT but E in BR
A: stimulus already said artificial field’s maintenance is cheap
B: natural is better. right AC. very straightforward
C: irrelevant
D: irrelevant
E: athletes prefer not to play on artificial grounds. but we don’t know if these athletes’ opinion is important or not.
1595628403
Wednesday, Sep 18 2019
#help I think E can wreck the argument because if you are allowed to work half day in Friday in an insurance company and half day as a blacksmith, then it’s not a just that John has to work for the insurance company each day from Monday to Thursday.
1595628403
Wednesday, Dec 18 2019
Engineering:
Premise: p/c determine the MC necessary for the success, but cannot express notion of purpose
Conclusion: only engineering can analyze the successful working of machine
Assumption: notion of purpose is used to judge the successful working of machine
Physiology:
Premise: p/c cannot ascertain by themselves these operational principles
Conclusion: only physiology can analyze organ’s role in body’s healthy functioning
(C) explains the notion of purpose has an analog in organisms. We know that physiology component lacks a counterpart of “notion of purpose”, but (C) claims there is an analog in organisms, this makes engineering and physiology comparable.
(B) has many problems. One is “good physiological functioning” is not the same as “organ’s role in body’s healthy functioning.(JY mentioned in the explanation) Another is “material conditions“ is not necessary, it could be other analogous conditions or functions. It doesn’t have to be the exact same as its counterpart.
The takeaway is that argument by analogy always requires the two things being comparable.
I picked C under timed because it’s the only AC points to the comparable/analog issue, though I didn’t understand its meaning.
(A) seems to also point to the comparable issue (machine-like), but “human organism” is completely wrong.
1595628403
Friday, Jul 17 2020
very helpful info! for anyone who are doing foolproof, do you redo the game immediately after watching video or settle down few days and come back revisit the game?
1595628403
Friday, Aug 16 2019
B compares the same area of different winter temperatures, which reinforced the pattern (causation) described in the stimulus. B used the word "led to" to indicate the causation.
C compares different areas of different temperature, so we cannot conclude from C that mild winter temperature “caused” or led to less storable water in summer. C just describes two correlated phenomenon.
Also, C lacked the "greater spring flooding" part.
1595628403
Friday, Aug 07 2020
Is there any way that can make us to choose which LR can be counted to the test?
1595628403
Monday, Aug 05 2019
Thanks you so much! However I'm having trouble with pinning questions on the review results page. I can see the pins for questions I already pinned in other places but unable to pin/unpin on this page.
1595628403
Sunday, Aug 04 2019
@ said:
First of all - Seamus is my son's name! (He's two) I don't see it often.
Second of all - one of the best pieces of advice I've heard (check out the 7sage podcast, episode 1 to hear for yourself) is that you should only take your next PT when you feel like you've made progress in some way - otherwise, what are you hoping to accomplish with another PT?
That could mean identifying trouble spots with certain question types or sections, and then drilling for those sections. Identify whether it's a timing issue or a problem with understanding concepts (your BR will tell you that), and solve for it as best you can. Generally I know when to take the next PT when I've done all of that as well as fool-proof method each game. Doing all of the above is going to help take you beyond the mid-160s plateau into 170+ territory.
Thanks for your advice and sharing the 7Sage podcast!
The advice that you should only take your next PT when you feel like you've made progress is not often heard of but it really makes sense to me. Is it the same for someone averaging around 160?
And could you explain more about "identify whether it's a timing issue or a problem with understanding concepts"? I've taken around 10 PTs but I'm not very clear of how to understand my BR score.
1595628403
Sunday, Aug 04 2019
Thanks for sharing this!
My question is that what if sometimes you cannot see the gap immediately? For example, in PT41-2-24, I cannot see the gap or flaw even after blind review. For these harder questions sometimes the general approach doesn't work for me (perhaps I didn't see the gap), what's your advice? Try negation test?
Thank you!!!
Have you decided whether to cancel? I was in the same situation and I decided to take a bet and didn’t cancel...