well D is just the wrong direction. A is ridiculous but D is def incorrect

all math questions should just be 5 stars

eeeeek

@RachelB.P. cute babies

@hsuyt25 Of course likewise!! Happy to help

@Elecoo Real

@josh_ullrich yupppp

@hsuyt25 Yes, what would support E? Large scale dishonesty and neglect will be destructive of society because people shouldn't neglect to vote? E is a premise that supports the main conclusion. The argument is saying "people shouldn't neglect to vote because MANY people not voting leads to social damage/destruction/whatever." Try to put E as the main conclusion and find support in the stim, then do the same with A and I think you will find a more fluent argument with A > E.

@VanillaCat or that's why it was hard for me

I think this is hard because it baits u into thinking the large proportion of all mail might somehow be the damaged slow mail that takes longer because they share the feature of "slow." But the "damaged slow mail" is a subset of the correctly addressed subset of the ALL mail superset. So the large proportion has got to include the other group (incorrectly addressed)

Lowkey math

@cclarez61 haha

e is incorrect because author isn't completely discarding the idea of innate talent, but rather arguing that it's not NECESSARY to exceptional performance

When you see: A and B --> C

And the conclusion mentions only A or only B

Look for an answer that forces the ignored condition to be present (SOMEHOW)

This COULD look like "merging" the two conditions

kevin ate with this explanation

@tommydoonan yup

you could also pick E because author said "schools" and not "school"

isn't B just saying int'l police is sufficient for effective int'l law (incorrect), while E is saying int'l police is necessary for effective int'l law (correct)

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

bruh sour?