TL;DR: In response to the question "Is there any benefit in watching these next few videos if I have already watched the split approach version of this same passage?" Kevin replied: "I don't think you need to watch these if you felt like the Split approach made sense."

It was at the bottom of the comments and I wanted to make sure it was easier to find for future viewers :)

I got 4/5 and did not BR. And was within time limits. There's hope friends!

If your eyes kinda glazed over and you weren't even able to understand the right answer in the video, I highly recommend reading the explanation in writing beneath the video. It REALLY helped me acknowledge there was a metaphorical iceberg in the metaphorical water.

If I'm getting it down to a 50/50 most of the time, should I be stoked or terrified?

I got 5/5 then 4/5 on BR. I did WAY better than I feel....

@dh2303 Thank you!! Very helpful!!

I'm having some trouble when considering the contrapositive. Are we able to use premise one (J --> computer TOB) to conclude /J because it's a sufficient condition and the contrapositive makes it a necessary condition? But we can't do this with premise two (computer TOB and RGBEL --> J) to be /J because that makes the sufficient necessary?

**Spark note; when and how can we determine to use De Morgans law re; contrapositive? #help #tutor?

Can someone help me determine when "but" because "and" vs "or?"