Indicators helped me on this trying to find which variables we needed to connect and D was a trap on that it was not a conditonal per se

Indicators helped me alot

@PLEASELETMETGETA190 Also the diagraming helped because I was like A was at the top of the conditonal chain therefore we are talking about what happens afterwards.

@IsabelTing11 Nice approach, i still diagrammed it in my head and it helped. However when I diagram i note it as numbers instead the actual variables since it helps me

@IsabelTing11 Hey i like your logic but I do not think there is a some here since the conclusion makes it to be A-->C, if there was a some D would not be a flaw, because the argument confuses a suffient for necessary

Quick note: this is the logic

1 (support tax plan) --> ~2 (no chance of winning)

3 (knows the economy) -->-1 (does not support the tax plan).

Our conclusion says that 2 (chance of winning)---> 3 (knows economy)

but this is far of a stretch because what if someone else does not support the tax plan, like scientist or lawyers. Pretty much it concludes something that is sufficient is necessary.

After knowing this without looking at any answer choice, I went straight to it.

D seems too weird but pretty much it says that there can be people who do not support the tax and do not understand the economy, pretty much saying the necessary condition (2) can happen without the sufficient condition (3). Hopefully this helps

Damm this was brutal and I got this right, omg, (last passage I failed it because of not reading the question right so due note to read the question right). I got this because i looked at para one and it stated that most nations did not establish reul because of the area being limited so the insignifcant word is fine

@Peter786 Nice explanation I had the same thoughts

I got this right, but Monroe, I hope the guys goes to the hopsital from those food. What made it easier for me is highlighting the first word in the first setennc ewhich higlights an indicator detaling the flaw of the argument

The test makers are devils to have a level four passage in p1. Regardless I beat the code and got all of them right. But still f word the test makers

Sometimes in LR, you have control over AC's that you know what they mean. AC i did not read but AC D i did and was like making their a controll group does not explain the discrepancy in the two sentences. The thought for D was to show that the conclusion were valid but it does not explain nothing.

AC E now reading it makes sense because it present an alternative factor showing that actually smoking was the one causing their heart attacks since it was higher on people who did not eat the fruit

As somone reported we are saying we have to have option one (Aliens being intelligent) if this is to work.

Then we show option two (sending spacecraft) does not work and option one is possible. This arguments creates a false dichotomy in that option one and two are the ones left. And AC D shows that by creating a dichotomy

My train of thought: So I flagged this but I am happy i got this right. AC B and C were the only ACs that were attractive.

AC B was attractive because of the word may since it is soft. But soft words does not matter if the subject matter is wrong. Although we mention pain intensity, we are not saying there thinking of the pain is impaired by the their belief of a cause.

We are saying that the people give a time delay on their belief and then their pain. therefore it does not make sense that B would be the conclusion since it does not account for the second temporal premise.

AC C is the correct AC because although imagining might not nice, we are saying that there is no correlation and that there is a time delay and varying accounts on what time their causes affect their pain.

Okay I flagged this because this was tough between C and E, but i see people were deciding over B.

AC E is incorrect because we are not making a conditional although we are assuming that the compounds in the brain are the culprits of affecting the symptoms. Remember we say that many symptoms are affected by organic factors.

AC B I liked because it was a Trap. I read it and was like yeah it makes sense, but then it says that it contributes to the compound deferences.

SO we are saying that A is causing B in the stimulus, and we are trying to show this is not true. AC B gives us context and says that C causes A which then A causes B which is not a good alternative explanation because it has to be shown that C either causes B or causes BOTH A and B.

AC C makes sense because cultural factors maybe the alternative explanation

I liked A alot because, we are saying this explanation shows the issue and if we solve it, then solve the issue. AC A says that the explanation is what is happening. If this is not true, then it would break the stim because then why do we have to do the soultion proposed.

AC D sounds good but there can be additional explanations which does not mean it is an ALTERNATIVE EXPLANTION.

Technically I seen flawed and other questions equating additional explanations with alternative explanations, however here we are in a tough NA therefore there are exceptions.

@SirHarvey Yes you are right but it is a safe assumption. Remember we are told that the law cannot be viewed as prohibiting poeople from smoking on homes.

Since homes are homes and CANNOT be interpreted as a workplace, the people that work there (Plumbers, etc) cannot be protected from second hand smoking. Key word here is interpret.

I know this question is annoying but we are allowed to make safe assumptions and safe assumptions are based on the topic being discussed

@pog420 Yeah and also safe assumtion that being assigned means you have no choice to work alone. Therefore D is correct. When it comes to these question types understand all rules, but mainly from what I know is that they use the second rule often because it is a bit more complicated

I will say for me POE was not used in this AC, and the translation in my head went fast.

I would say pick and answer and move on, to not put too much time into this question.

AC a is correct because we are trying to link the idea of obtaining money and happiness. Also another thing that makes A correct is the word should since our stimmy conclusion has the word should therefore it might be best to have it in the answer.

Regardless, A says Money should be obtained ---> not make happiness unobtainable. Without health we know you cannot get happiness, and if you cannot get happiness then if we connect it with A we should not acquire money.

I got this one right, but flagged it because I was between D and C.

C is wrong because of the word speculative. The author is not guessing what is occurring, rather he is explaining why society gets technological benefits.

AC D I liked because of the first sentence of the passage. Remember we are saying that these benefits are not because of an accident, therefore the author in the sentence we are referring to utilizes an explanation of what causes the democratization of the benefits.

Remember to read the previous sentence and understand the turns or why the author is using this line.

Remember the primary purpose is its purpose. Even if A is factually true, it is not the main point. This is an explanation passage of the artist work and B shows that explanatory power better. Curiosity i felt meant more so that an author goes on a quest which here we did not because the author explained what the art was and who the artist was responding to. Remember the direction not only the factually true part

@kingroseyyy Hey I choose D but D is wrong because we are saying they are stubborn but the entire group can be based on outside information and then then they become stubborn

@mperweb Yeah I will say I now know what makes the logic sticking. Every question has word indicaotros showing the bridge in the logic or any sense of paradox, and when I saw that they were comparing the group with the group in the first round, it clicked.

@iloveenergydrinks Your correct pretty much it confuses the sufficient with necessary

@cindyguo2020253 One of their explanation did not sound right, but I got E through a different lens, I stated that since egg cartons are the easiest for the egg carton, and therefore it does not need to be cleaned, their might be foods that come into contact to other styrofoam container. This made sense.

You are right since we have to say the eggs did not came into contact.

Read the question, question stem matters