5/5 omgggg

@MagicMushroom yeah no more than 1:15 on a question

got it right on BR ugh

got this right within 54 seconds but somehow i was still over time????? GIRL WHAT

this was almost too good to be true

@petvma october!! 🫪

@petvma me too!! when are u taking the test?

4/5 and i was SO good with timing!!!

@Alysa_Suleiman omg reminds me of intro psych classes!!!! good ol days

so would "tends to" and "likely" be considered correlational claims then?

@MacyHolcomb i think its usually [the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that...] or [which of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the argument's reasoning?] or strengthen/weaken questions

when i started this part of the CC this was intuitive and easy. the more im learning though the more IM CONFUSED

when im drilling, what should i use as the filter for these types of questions?

3/5 then 5/5 BR

this was so helpful!!! i think venn diagramming is easier than lawgic in this case

5/5 🤌🏼

2/3 then 3/3 br

ok this might be oversimplifying it? but, the way i understand it super fast is

A -m-> B.

A -m-> C.

then you just take whatever's on the right side of the arrow on both conditions, and put the some quantifier in between. therefore

B <- s -> C

some tom cruise movies star katie holmes. all katie holmes movies are good. therefore, some good movies star tom cruise.

TC-mov ← s → KH → good. therefore, TC-mov ← s → good.

@MeelahSarumi thats right but you have to know what that statement means simply. if its not the case that the record does well, then you will be famous, you're simply saying: your record could sell well but not make you famous.

@KennedyLuther you are taking the contrapositive instead of negation. for negation, you just have to "prove" that the first statement is not true (to keep it simple). so to negate this, you basically have to say no thats false. some x wings don't have hyperdrives. or an easier example would be (all dogs are white). no, thats false! some dogs actually are not white.

@aditikapadia no, because some suggests that "at least one" new yorker has to ride the train. but the negation requires it to be anywhere between zero to exactly half (remember: most is more than half). so if there are 10 total new yorkers, it would have to not be the case that more than half are riding the train. so if 5 or less new yorkers ride the train, we can negate it by saying [it is not the case that most new yorkers ride the train].

its important to understand that both the original statement and the negation cannot both be true at once. the key reason "not all" doesn't work is that "most" already allows for some exceptions. a statement like "most new yorkers ride the train" makes both that statement and "not all new yorkers ride the train" true at the same time. and negation cannot coexist with the original statement

@TimCrawford thats contrapositive! you can negate them. eg., [some tom cruise movies are boring]. TC-mov <- s -> boring. that is the same as saying [some boring things are tom cruise movies]. but you cannot say [no boring things are tom cruise movies] because the original suggests that "at least one" (remember, some means at least one) movie that stars tom cruise is boring.

however you can negate it. to negate "at least one" you have to argue "that there is not even one." so the negation would be no thats not true. there is no intersection between boring things and tom cruise movies. so, [none of tom cruise's movies are boring OR no tom cruise movies are boring].

the two statements cannot both be true, and they cannot both be false.

i hope this helps?

@DevanshiPatel makes sm more sense lol thanks!!!!

@SuperCola06 same