3/5. i spent 9 minutes on #2 and 5 minutes on #3 and i still go them wrong. i dont know how to intuitively shallow dip without lawgic. sometimes these stimuli do not have lawgic in them so how do yall figure this stuff out.

eleven. minutes.

this one made no sense. i think it gets hard knowing when to do lawgic and when not to. because i thought these were all lawgic, but apparently they are not. answer choice A made nooooo sense to me.

this one was hard af lmaoooo omg

@cwferrari oo this is a good point!!

i got a 5 difficulty one right and a 2 difficulty wrong. lmao #omg

i got this right but it took me 14 mins. the shallow dip doesnt click for me without all, most, or some statements. when they are presented like this, i have to map everything out and its killin me

i got this right but it took me 5 mins and 25 secs LMAOO

i diagrammed it to the tea and got A. lmaoooooo oh my god. this section is going to wreck me.

I don't understand the below:

Anyone who takes my advice… – This is the conditional premise. ‘Anyone’ introduces the ‘if’ part of the premise…this is already wrong. This makes ‘took my advice’ the sufficient condition. But if this were going to match the contrapositive structure in the stimulus it should say ‘If someone does not take my advice.’ Wrong.”

If the conditional for this example is advice --> happiness, why wouldn't we look for the answer choice that says "if someone DOES take my advice, then, Y." The lesson says it has to be "someone does not take my advice," but I dont understand the logic behind this. Do we only look for contrapositive parallel's for this or?

the answer makes noooooo sense lmao. the stimulus said that the computer correctly diagnosed people with heart attacks. so HOW is that answer choice correct if we have to take these premises as true.

where are all these rules bruh. lmao like how is saying the conclusion is false a flaw rule?! im gonna take a few days of break because i swear, this section is so left field.

im confused, y is this question repeated

i am only getting some of these right through POE. my god

every time im thinking i understand a module, i get humbled. this sucks

there is no way this is level 1 difficulty.

I started this module and did not understand wth I was reading. I took a 1-2 week break and just focused on drilling other question types. Came back and restarted the module (i was only abt 5 lessons in) and I understand it so much more now. patience really is key.

I got it right but I do not know why. I'm writing my lawgic down but I got favor --> built from the principle, then /favor --> /built from the conclusion. So there is an issue there with the stimulus logic but I can't seem to figure out how A accounts for that.

@rjon27 reading it as "assumes" was a game changer for me.

bummed out that there is no explanation video for this one :(

i still dont understand this one lmao. this is going to be a skip on test day for sure!

i got it right... after 15 mins lmao

im lowkey confused.... the flaws we just learned in the youtube video a few lessons back...are they the method to the right answer or are they the flaws from the stimulus to recognize? I'm pretty sure I'm going to have to restart this module :')

4/5! i really liked the mor lesson.

Is there a way to take prep tests untimed so that it doesnt kick you off once the timer is up?