I got it right but I was questioning myself. When I take the contrapositive, not knowing it belongs to someone else is the necessary condition. Doesn't that make it a requirement?

bs

Had Dumbledore visited their graves, perhaps walked past Lily’s and James’s to do so? And he had never once told Harry . . . never bothered to say . . .

And why it was so important, Harry could not explain even to himself, yet he felt it had been tantamount to a lie not to tell him that they had this place and these experiences in common.

The negation trick here to see if the argument still stands helped.

The "much" got me. I thought it should be equal in difficulty.

Target time: 01:43

ok.

Hang in there. Mapping the conditions will help.

They really packed so much information in there and then made the answers so long and put the right one last. Just evil.

I got it right but took 3 eons.

I got got by how I named my terms

Did you end up cooking or being cooked?

Jesus Christ Monkey Balls

The wording. Claude have mercy.

Pardon me, but so what? What if the company is willing to throw it all in to save this one product? Yours is an assumption and so is mine. We aren't given any reason to make these assumptions except for our outside knowledge and from what I've noticed in this exam we aren't supposed to rely on how we think a rational actor might operate. This is an imprecisely constructed question.

Isn't this a huge assumption to make? We aren't told they'd prefer not to sacrifice their company for the success of this drug so why are we taking that for granted? Like so what? What if the company is willing to throw it all in for the product to succeed? See how insane it is to take my assumption? Then why should we assume this? I feel like the explanation in this video here is merely finding reasons to make it work after the fact.

They teach a level one question, then slap you in the face with a level 4 or 5 to try.

I completely didn't clock the non-randomness of the experiment.

Well done.

If the answer isnt A and isnt clearcut, I spend an eon on the question.

Yeah eat sheet. So businesses don't reside in the city as well?

Well done!

Kevin's explanation says that the author has no opinion here. I think the point here is that Cézanne inspired modernism; the dispute is whether he, himself, was a modernist.

First time ever doing one with time to spare.

I think you ought to focus on "why should I believe the critics are wrong?" That makes the last sentence seem more like support. If you ask "why should I believe it is impossible to determine?", the answer takes you away from the context and focuses on just the premise at the end. I hope this doesn't make it more confusing.

Okay. Something is clicking.

Literally