Hi I recently took a drill and during review in one of the explanations I saw a live video where a student was taking a full PT. I though it was super helpful.
Are there any more of these videos on 7sage?
Ok writing this up incase it is helpful, but also I might just be off, so take this with a grain of salt. I was not satisfied with the explanations with A because I was missing a key component of Flaw Questions - vague language can be good.
If B is true and we overlooked that people are influenced by the report about the debate, that is huge because that could even mean that people who read reports are extremely influenced to vote for who won. Of course that also means the opposite can be true. They are not really impressed...they don't vote for the winning candidate, etc. This vague language is why I chose A over B. However you simply cannot just assume one way or the other, it certainly can be true that people are extremely influenced, we just won't know until we experiment it out. I would even argue that "more likely" actually narrows the scope of upside, by saying more likely, we are putting the potential for upside in a box, again what if B is extremely likely.
Influenced really is a vague word in terms of spectrum of support can be minimal or large AND in terms of the actions the people could be influenced to do. They could be influenced to campaign for the candidate, vote for the candidate, etc.
I am so used to not choosing vague answers but in flaw, when we are trying to point out what someone overlooked, sometimes vague language is better.
ofc there is the other mistakes people pointed out about the exciting and assuming voting which are discussed in the rest of this thread..
@lawstudent0109 woah - i think C could be right if it said "takes for granted" right?
As someone who chose E - JY abruptly ending after calling me stupid using the rock example was funny. The first sentence was so conclusionesq I did not pay enough attention to the last sentence and subsequently the "ignore". My advice would be as once commenter pointed out 'Yes would mean "don't ignore it dumbass" and No would mean "told ya so"'. Also be wary of some on question types like this.
Between A and B - B is the right answer but cant get passed that we have to make assumptions for both A and B. B we have to assume there are no other tests that indicate stress and A we have to assume that the higher dosage means the drug is ineffective. I guess B's assumption makes more sense because in this case we have to assume that there are no other tests and the stim never said there are other test and the AC also did not say there were other tests so it is a better assumption to make.
I made the same mistake twice - self portrait I am thinking is just their way of saying portrait lol
E looks so much like they saying to protect the forest. 😭 im tired of this grandpa
I got this wrong because I thought that C did not talk about the environmental pressures. However the distinct human species and the negation of the previous scientist claim should have been enough
i got this right by process of elimination - but if someone could clarify - "would have unacceptably counterintuitive consequences". I almost did not choose this one bc stim did not explicitly talk about consequences.
IMO i think C and E are tricky bc both are not being 100%. "Varies" and "Similar". I need more info on how similar and how much it varies to decide between C and E.
Hi I recently took a drill and during review in one of the explanations I saw a live video where a student was taking a full PT. I though it was super helpful.
Are there any more of these videos on 7sage?
OMG we are having the same problem rn. idk lmk if you figure it out, rn i am reading permutation city which is a interesting but hard to read sci fi and then making myself summarize the past few pages time to time. at the very least it has given me back the confidence that I can read LOL.
so if B said will decrease would that be the correct answer or is E even stronger.
how do we know paragraph 1 is ricks talking about rosenthals ideas. I got confused and thought it was his ideas
How do you know when it is time/useful to do conditionals vs not - any tips?
the arg is basically - bc of adrenaline frightening experiences are remembered more clearly (than non-frightening).
IG my confusion was that if we can get in a AC that non-frightening experiences can be remembered better. Then that would mean that adrenaline is not the cause of this. So I kept A.
When I read AC C i realized that we can also break the argument by saying that adrenaline != frightening. Which would be really devastating for the arg bc the whole thing is that adrenaline is the reason for frightening experiences, but if adrenaline is also present in non-frightetning experiences that would destroy the arg. Since we never fully established that adrenaline == frightening, it would weaken the most.
bruh I missed the "I Know" . completly changes it because without the I know its circular right? So A would be correct?
Guys maybe I shouldn't be taking the LSAT bc I dont even understand what it means to cross against a red light. I spent half the question asking myself, wouldn't that mean the cars have stopped on the red light 😭