#feedback

this section could do with some more structure and definitions

I had a hard time eliminating D. I thought saying analog systems have a "practical disadvantage" was support that it is inferior in most practical purposes. Im still not sure why that was wrong, except for the fact that most is too strong.

#help

J.Y. asked if there are other reasons that could explain the phenomenon. My first thought was.

AC) All the candidates who had extensive experience were recently involved in a corruption scandal.

that would makes sense because the stim doesn't tell us if experience is the only thing the students value.

uhh I got this right because I figured surviving each stage wasn't the whole picture. if each stage is 10 years and there are 20 stages, it doesn't matter that each individual stage is survivable, everyone will still probably die (of old age) on the journey. thats how I got to the answer without thinking about probabilities at all.

#feedback #help. where do we learn about circular reasoning? I know the term but I feel like we are just supposed to understand it. is there a 7sage lesson that goes over this?

#feedback, this didn't feel like a lesson, it seemed identical to a "you Try" I wish this section had more theory and generalizable strategies, instead of just practice.

B is so mean...

I got fooled but AC B saying "or both". I eliminated B because of that phrase. To me, if the oil field gradually lowered AND (or both) a new field was discovered that would mean the nations oil reserve was in states meaning the conclusion that the nations were mistake incorrect. Did anybody else catch that intricacy? what am I doing wrong here? how does the option of "and both" not disqualify AC B? #help

Can anyone point me to where we learned how to use data as causal reasoning. This feels so different from how I would usually approach a strengthen question. #help

I mapped the premise as

Rule

Prize--> Ex v Fam

Ed: ~Fam--> Ex

not ~Ex--> Fam

is that wrong?

but why is it a wrong translation? How do I know not to translate like this in the future? did I translate wrong? is this a general rule about how to represent or

#feedback. The Dan Epps video is no longer linked

I choose A so confidently, I see now how that was wrong but I dont see how E was right.

How I read the stim is that the GMO does not trigger the rule of applying the label, so for GMO specifically in that product, it is not triggered and the obligation to label the product does not occur. That doesn't mean the product shouldn't be labeled for other ingredients/reasons. So we just dont know if it needs the label overall.

I think I am confusing need not be labeled with not need to be labeled. NEED NOT is a negative ~Labeled, while NOT NEED is inconclusive?

Did anybody else make the same error? or have any insights as to why my interpretations was wrong?

Id love to join

so when the question talked about compound in the brain, I immediately thought about iron, or some mineral/vitamin that we need to do brain stuff. that choice made the connection that B supported the conclusion instead of of a flaw more clear.

I found this easier than the previous ones. I treated it like a weaken question. Lol I thought J.Y. was was trying to trick us

Could we not eliminate C and E solely on the reason that it talks about the modern western world? and Barbu is only concerned within ancient greek civilization?

interesting, I thought C was a trap answer appealing to authority like E. But wiring a navel battle is clearly a military ambition.

the video and the text lesson have contradicting categorizations. which one is the right one?

#feedback

My low res summary was

Single Crop Bad-->Solution Crop Rotation

/Crop Rotate---> Soil Suppress <---Bad bac killed by PS bac

I understand why Kevin did the hypothesis but this is an alternative cave man speak that took me seconds to write as I went.

Yes I use these, but I don't understand expected accuracy is calculated? is it just the Blind Review score?

#feedback, the second video (question explanation) if for an entirely different passage

Q10:

Why is a dangerous decision indefensible? it could commit the author to some strange claims but that doesnt lead to indefensible to me, the author could still defend their shitty position. I choose A because if you do take that "indefensible" position, you must deny that studying thinking process is possible. to me A is the consequence of E. So I guess I dont see why A is wrong.

#help

I really thought E was the NA and that D was the SA. does anyone understand why E wasn't an NA? I get it's not a super helpful assumption but people telling the truth is still necessary for the argument.

#feedback. I would like more explanation to why B is wrong for question 18, especially considering it was the most popular answer.

#feedback this is a great lesson.

I have moved on to LR but my highest priority subject for improvement is consistency Conditional logic. I found doing drills didnt isolate it enough.

This new skill builder isolates what we have learned in conditional logic and really helped me practice.

It would be great if there was more complicated versions of this to practice with, especially ones with context like a LR question. I found my diagrams get really messy when I have to deal with prarsing entire paragraphs. I would love a skill builder that focuses on pulling out the logic of complex statements, like the LR question stems.