i got this wrong twice - i chose AC E for both actual and blind review. i think i was contextually tripped up by "after adjustments for inflation", both in the stim and in the AC A. like i dont really know what that means, like who adjusts it? for better or worse? idk but it scared me lol, but i guess it doesnt actually matter to the meaning of neither the stim nor the ac overall... ignoring it doesn't change anything. i shouldve ignored it.

Like other people mentioned, I visualized B as providing a "U shape" graph/correlation. If the middle ground spends less than either extreme, then to go from highest spending to moderate spending would be a decrease in anxiety/depression, but then to go from moderate spending to lowest spending would be an increase in anxiety/depression, back up to where it started...

So is this still strengthening the argument anyway because despite the increase in anxiety/depression from moderate spending to low spending, the total amount of anxiety/depression still has not increased in comparison to the highest spending?

i rlly hope this makes sense someone pls #help

also i see now in retrospect why C is wrong. but still B tripped me up anyway

@sternbm1851 exactly my issue, i thought more govt spending implied more positive involvement

@goblue27 same...

I got this one correct, because I found it clear that A was only going to make this phenomenon more confusing and less supported... but still, is it reasonable to essentally ask students to make the assumptiont that stress leads to heart disease? This is actually the 2nd time I'm seeing this correlation of stress and physical health be implied in PT 156. I get it, but only because of outside knowledge...

I chose C. Now, I see why E is correct. It discusses that an alternative pathway could have been taken to better / more easily achieve the goal. Is C wrong because there's not really a "goal" in mind?

The stimulus goal = reduce government spending. E's goal = to become famous. I honestly assumed C had the goal of ... successful collaboration? Was that a reach?

I chose ac E, even though I felt like it was very vague and wordy, I pretty much selected it from process of elimination. I disregarded ac B because my personal bias took 'unremarkable' to be understood in a negative light, and I thought it was hounding on women doctors. Whereas in reality, it's just an objective and neutral term...oopsie

@180 Nevermind. Watched explanation video... scary that I didnt catch that!! :(

So the stimulus is A --> B. Therefore, B --> A.... I get why A is correct, but why is E wrong?

E says A --> B, therefore B --> A.... Right? Is this not the same reasoning?

I considered A but didn't select it because I thought, "well what if technological innovation was the way that the government increased control over safety conditions?" But I guess that's an assumption.

Soooo is there any possible way to handle this question intuitively? Lol although I understand the formal logic chains when watching the explanation videos, I am much too shakey to be confident in my own formal logic conclusions and they usually lead me astray / overcomplicate things when I'm actually in the timed test or drill.

@Cindigo Sometimes if you took a very long time to answer they'll ask you to blind review. just testing your confidence i guess

I assumed B would be wrong because it felt like a stretch to claim that Consciousness must be explained by MORE than just physical processes. Like who said it had to include physical processes at all? Am I missing something?

I chose E, but now I see that's directly contradicted by the statement "The second reform took a more comprehensive approach". But still, C just doesn't seem like a good answer. It sounds very empathetic, whereas the author's original tone sounded more critical or objective.

@MK2323 Me too, I misunderstood E in this way. I took 'determine' as more of 'reveal' rather than 'cause'.

Okay I chose A. Now watching JY's video, I get how it's a direct contradiction, based on the "definition" of modern science we get in the first sentence. But I chose A because of the last sentence of the stimulus, "very few find evidence that global warming is unlikely".

Is this not basically saying that the hypothesis of global warming has not been widely proven as incorrect, and thus, the reluctant scientists are not acting in accordance with scientific debate standards? If global warming is not widely being proven false then shouldn't the scientists accept it as a valid hypothesis?

@Marie-AnnPrah hi! im making it rn you can private chat me your #

@yeasmins099444 hi! im making it rn you can private chat me your #

@RhiannonBogart hi! im making it rn you can private chat me your #

@ehrishin hi! im making it rn you can private chat me your #

@MikaelaPompilii hi! im making it rn you can private chat me your #

@MarwaJalal hi! im making it rn you can private chat me your #

@KP803 hi! im making it rn you can private chat me your #

@Karladenise444 hi! im making it rn you can private chat me your #

@180 Okay I get it now, A was an irrelevant comparison. Still, as someone who's never really come by the phrase "means to an end", I feel wronged lol