- Joined
- May 2026
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
@AlexanderFry It's implied that they are referring to dancing. When they don't refer to odor or a different mechanism, we assume they are talking about dancing. That is how I interpreted although it is not implied well, in my opinion. They fail to address this in the passage and the video. The context allows us to assume they are referring to dancing.
I thought they were asking about the second sentence... oops, read carefully!
During a timed practice section, I sometimes forget I need to lock in and go, and end up not having enough time for 2-3 questions- just me? While on a full timed PT or just most of the timed practice in general I am able to answer every question with enough time. However, because I know it doesn't count against me I guess my subconscious kicks in and says, "its not a PT or the real thing, no pressure don't worry."
Just curious if this ever happens to others, its not common for me but once or twice a month I've noticed it. I also haven't taken a off day for a long time...
I think outside info would help here, because I had no clue that the formation of the crust happened after the formation of the earth? Doesn't really make sense, but this shows you cant assume!
Not a fan of this question. How does one get from Not more difficult to emphasize to our conclusion Does not call the attention? It seems the contrapositive rule is not follow and the the opposite of the conclusion is used not the actual conclusion. If that is the case B might as well be right. I guess I am missing something. If you claim the contrapositive of the premises doesn't the link the conclusion also have to be a contrapositive??
@HappyTestTaker The argument concludes that those who eat nuts regularly are less likely to be overweight. This is enough to explain that "most people who regularly eat nuts" is strong enough to resolve it.
okay so its true this is a good example of principle questions where it isn't stated in passage B but implied because its underlying! Passage never says its necessary to use objective measures but he does argue for it the whole time obviously- hence you have to connect that it underlies.
When negating an AC on a NA question, you can negate from anywhere? because not most for B is some. not sure if that wrecks the argument but it seems it doesn't?
So least likely to agree with means if it is not mentioned then we can say is least likely to agree with this? Because liberal policies are not mentioned anywhere so I thought there was not enough information doe the author to not agree with that. We just don't know!
@ConnerKline Doesn't most in the question stem also help with C being correct? The other part is that it says best expresses in the q stem. so even though most might be to strong its the best asnwer.
Ive been told you can negate any figure once in the AC but I am not sure if that holds true here because I did the same thing and only negated unable! If you only negate anyone to some it makes sense doesnt ruin argument, but if you negatejust unable it does ruin the argument.