@AndrewKansky I agree, the negation test is truly a lifesaver. I got 5/5 by doing negation tests; obviously wayyy over time but we'll get there eventually.

when will you wear wigs

I was personally victimized by pursue the good life premise

small spotted guppies

@gurbytown thank you, this helped a lot!

I got it right but I have no idea what a "reachable" versus "unreachable" conclusion is. Does anyone have a good way to explain it? helppppp

@Tombee64 I didn't even know that was an option! I was wondering why so many people were talking about trying the questions out lol

me thinking shortsighted meant literally people that can't see well 🤡

@Oblivion All of them are worth the same amount of points no matter the difficulty! keep your head up!

Question for Choice D: the opinion of current users of low-wattage bulbs as to their effectiveness. The explanation that we are given for D regards the opinion people have about the bulbs' effectiveness as the same thing as the bulbs' actual effectiveness, when in past questions students have been advised to note the difference between someone's opinion on something, and the actual thing itself. Why is this distinction suddenly not an issue for D? Is it just because the average person would reasonably have a pretty accurate opinion on the efficacy of something as trivial as a lightbulb?

@MA66 I was confused by this too

@JAndonian16 I think that answer choice E does not guarantee the truth of snoring causing damage/abnormalities, it just makes it more likely to be true (because you eliminated the possibility of reverse causality). My impression from the lesson was that the "bar" for the strength of the conclusion in the stimulus is not at the "must be true" level, so choosing E does not mean snoring must have caused the damage/abnormalities, it just increases the likelihood of it being true.

me after this question

Can I eliminate choice C on the basis that receiving an award does not necessarily mean that the designs are superior?

@SavanahHoffstein yeah that is confusing. Maybe the small firms have won awards for their proposals or renders/mockups for corporate projects, but have never actually been awarded a contract, idk.

@Kevin_Lin Thanks Kevin!

Very silly way of understanding, but helped me. If we have 5 people in a study, and two of them have a genetic predisposition to Parkinson's, and we ensure all of them are consuming exactly the same amounts of iron (I put spinach to represent iron; spinach has iron, right?), then we can basically "cancel out" or ignore iron for the time being since it is controlled for/held constant. So, if we look at our sample of 5 people now, (including our two people with the genetic predisposition), and none of them are more likely than one another to develop Parkinsons, that means that genetic predisposition is not the cause of Parkinson's. This eliminates that possibility as an alternative explanation for what the cause of Parkinson's is in the stimulus; which strengthens the journalist's reasoning. I think the reason Answer Choice A is confusing is because you have to weaken genetics before you strengthen iron. I kept getting tripped up because I was thinking "Why isn't Answer A a weaken?" it actually DOES weaken, it just weakens something (genetics explanation) which we need to weaken in order to strengthen the journalist's argument.

if you want to see some funny spurious correlations, go to https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

2/5 but 100% on blind review 🤣😭

Please do more of this #feedback

@yougotthis! I have the same question!

@ckilk I am struggling with this distinction too. How do I know that the statement "all dogs are friendly" is not a conditional? My instinct was to put it into lawgic as "if dog --> friendly" and "/friendly --> /dog." Why can't I do that? Thanks!

if anyone got confused in the video explanation, J.Y. misspoke at about 0:38; he meant to say "shape" not "colour"

if the two relationships are considered the same for our purposes, why is is not okay for me to use the visualization of the circles for both. I know it is wonky to do it for things that are not really objects, but it helps me a lot. Am I shooting myself in the foot?