I said If you have to make an inference, ask: what would the text support the most?

Ex. Passage is about the survival of dinosaurs. stem says: which would the author agree with?

• AC: dinosaurs eat leaves for nutrients

• Maybe we have to make an inference that eating leaves = nutrients that are necessary to survival

• This inference is safe to make

A DANGEROUS assumption/inference to make would be: dinosaurs knit scarves (to survive)

The passage doesn't support (AT ALL) dinosaurs-knitting-scarves = conducive to survival

this passage is unbelievable i don't think fractal geometry is even a thing ... they def made that up

I just did A--> B , A --> /C, C --> /B

A vs B....B leads to bad C. We shouldn't do bad C. So we should choose A

i've been looking for a negation in the ACs that is super close to the disproving the conclusion but the explanation that the negation just needs to make the premise NOT guarantee the conclusion is helpful

so a dandelion has developed claws on its own but the claws further developed to be sharper from insects attacking it

This makes me sour

bruh sour?

if the conclusion is comparing two options: "if (a) one option) is not likely, then it's probably (b) this option)," you can strengthen the argument by (further) weakening option A

ohhh the "procedure of discrimination" = nipping

@VanillaCat but i understand now

i thought discernible = noticeably LARGE

A is only good because the other ACs are so bad

i didn't remember you could negate conditionals like that

@MichelleSap DOWNvoted

i am so goated at parallel questions it's not even funny

it is helpful to separate each idea to figure out what the author actually has a problem with (the technological advance itself or the motivation behind the technological advance)

couldn't you also say that D is incorrect because it's referring to a subset of physical therapy (botched) when our claims are concerned with the entire set of PT? so if we "resolved" the mystery of why the botched people are reaching the same level of PT-only people, we would still be left confused why the normal (D+PT) people are reaching the same level? or maybe just the botched people are an entirely different group that is unrelated to our claims..Thinking.

i thought i was so smart and sneaky choosing C

@Kellbell206 hello yes the second one just refers to /USA --> /NYC. i'm a little confused what you are asking, if the necessary is NY, then yes NYC or East Coast could be sufficient conditions. but if we are looking at relationship between NYC and USA, failing the necessary (USA) means there's no possible way we could meet the sufficient (NYC). mayb your first sentence is where confusion lies? failing the necessary DOES guarantee we failed the sufficient (failing to be in USA does guarantee failing to be in NYC). 😊

@lsatjasg for real

we did it sagers <3 now we will all branch out into our separate paths

i am eatinggg these

broooo

Yayayayyay we won