I would love to have the ask me anything classes come back on the weekends! I found them super helpful and wish they could be added again!
- Joined
- May 2025
- Subscription
- Live
Admissions profile
Discussions
So for Phenomenon- Hypothesis, its possible to have a passage with no critique and just a hypothesis?
I don't understand how we would get "misguided" from the text. I didn't choose A because of this.
I thought that paragraph 4 was presenting the solutions to the issue as the court ended up ruling in favour of Boyd? Meaning that it is the main point of the passage? #help #feedback
#Feedback. So the flaw in this question is that the argument didn't Negate B first and then negate A. But instead Negated A and then B, which is not how sufficient/necessary rules work.
Is this thinking correct?? Thanks!
I'm confused about what this means: "Again, recall that the conclusion is conditional. We’re already positing a hypothetical world where we’ve prevented all iatrogenic diseases."
Does this mean that since the conclusion is conditional, the wrong answer choices will include "prevention of all iatrogenic diseases"
how will I know when to use this type of analysis? Will ever AC for Method of Reasoning follow this format? #help #feedback
Hi! Is this thinking correct? The correct answer choice can never say the excerpt is an assumption? #feeback
I don't understand the "Imitation" part. I did not get this from the stimulus which is why I got the question wrong. #feedback
#feedback. I'm confused how one rule gets to justified vs unjustified? Is that normal?
I'm also confused by what JY means when he says "Trigger" it. How does this work? #feedback
Hi! I'm confused by what Prescriptive Conclusion means? How does this help with the argument etc? #Feedback #help
#Feedback. I'm wondering if this is correct thinking: for PSAr questions, the correct answer choice should not add anything extra or new facts, or other considerations. The correct answer choice should just lay out P --> C.
I didn't see the Cost benefit analysis at the beginning which is why I got it wrong
I'm super confused on how A and D are different. D is wrong since it discusses what a lawmaker "thinks" but A does the exact same thing. #feedback
I'm a bit confused by what question types this section is dealing with? Just questions that are non-causal? What skill should I be practicing here? I've just been thinking about which AC would be most reasonable.
How do you know when the question is talking about a correlation vs Causation? Or is every question like that? Just from reading the stimulus I could not tell it was discussing a correlation. #help #feedback
hi! I don't understand what they mean by "New data that is consistent with the hypothesis being either true or false." this was in the Patterns for Wrong answers section. #feedback
Hi! I'm wondering if anyone understands how to identify this question as an experiment? What makes this question different from the other "Strengthening" questions we did earlier before introducing ideal experiments? I'm confused on how I would identify it
I was confused by "correctly" in A. I thought that was too big of an assumption. When in the video it says thats what helps makes A correct.
Is this just confusing sufficient for necessity? The way I see it as an invalid conclusion is because we don't know if she delivered her speech, we just know that the assassination attempt failed.