Keep cooking everyone. Your future self will thank you 10 fold for the work you are putting in. And being a lawyer is all about the grind. Might as well start now.

@MarcosGuzman415 I like to just read the description below. I want to get used to reading a lot since that is what lawyers do haha

go yankees

This one seemed too good to be true haha

@NoaF123 lmao fr

NA is definitely not my strong suit. Will have to come revisit this lesson.

That being said, when you guys answer a question right and are looking at it in review, when you read the description of the answer that the instructors write out, are you coming to a similar conclusion? I feel like I am usually not thinking the same way as them but arriving at the same answer.

From my understanding with NA questions, if we are not entirely sure from the jump, just go straight into POE by negating the ACs and see what makes the most sense and what AC negated would ruin the argument.

@LanceLing Just read the transcript section.

@Imtryingggggg I usually just read the text and if I am still confused or lost I will also watch the video. I am just preparing myself for future lawyer and law school activities which is a lot of reading. Better to start now haha

It could just be me, but some of these SA questions I am getting right very easily, and others I cannot make sense of them for the life of me. This is going to be a long unit.

4/5 then 4/5 after 2 tries. Not 100% but i will take 80% at this rate

Querying

That was a level 1? wow

I second guessed D because of the word "serious" accidents lol

@Christuck.r felt that exact way in blind review. Lol

@TeklaCo Same here

Wow I cannot believe I answered this one correctly. So far I have been a huge why would I map out lawgic, and I needed it for this question to get it correct. Without lawgic there is no chance I would have answered this question correctly.

Brutal

I got AC D fairly quickly but took awhile second guessing myself because it just seemed to simple of an AC to be correct. However I stuck with my gut and was correct. I think this is a good lesson to always trust your first instinct on test day.

Got it right. May have been a little (a lot) over time but at this stage I just want correct answers.

@brycekrampert I don't believe so. Since "no" is your group 4 indicator you would just simply negate ''undergo transformation"

@Brie97 I had the same question as well. I have not made it through foundations yet, but I believe when we are able to apply our Lawgic to a stimulus we will be able to depict what the question is asking easier. And find out flaws or what must be true, etc.

I really just want to know how all of this applies to the questions. I want so badly to get to the point that we are learning question types and be able to use our lawgic to find and predict answers. I must stay the course.

@NovaBates lmao fr

@Cweathers Yes you would have to flip them because negating the conditional relationship your sufficient condition now becomes your necessary condition