Ah I saw the impressionistic approach and thought that because both the New Women and Chopin used the method it couldn't be a difference--I failed to see the "more consistently throughout" and make the connection to the "more fully"

12/14 - argh the idea of a "possible" objection only being a hypothetical object not an actual objection got me

10/14 then 14/14 br -- I think taking the time to flush out differences between answers in POE and really remove myself from the knowledge I know vs. the knowledge given in the stimulus, is key

12/15 - for all 3 that I got wrong (right on BR) was that I was debating between two answers, but on BR was able to properly flush out which was right v wrong and why...timing on these though...

pleasantly surprised - 13/14

definitely struggled on timing though, especially reading the paragraphs and making notes of the different perspectives (my take on low res summaries) heklped. And then delving into questions. Some were a bit tricky the questions and I found myself second gussigng a tad but sometimes ig we just got to go for it !

About 30 seconds over; tried to shallow dip until they all jumbled together and then realized I needed to default to logic so that helped a ton more especially on these options that seem so similar

The shallow dipped part really helped, I was a bit skeptical at first but automatically eliminating a,b,c helped, then examining d to see it's not the same subject and bam, it's e

life has made sense this definitely helped to understand the last lesson part too

Was debating between A and C for a tad, but the key thing is that assumptions are implicit so if you can find the part of the stimulus quoted in the stimulus itself you can already cross out any options with "assumptions"

This was quite confusing for me, I kept writing the arrows as rol -> indiv freedom because one led to the other but mixed it up becuse I forgot that rol is necessary for indiv freedom so i would be indiv freedom -> rol

these are starting to make sense, I think the main trick is accurately pointing out what is the main conclusion/argument here and then from there POE based on what is relevant to the argument and makes sense given the premises

getting better with instincts on these!!

is this just not a psa question? I dont really get the difference lwk...

Distinguishing between the fact that we're looking at the benefit in geneal to consumers rather than the extent of the benefit makes D vs. E clearer

Note to self: replace the jargon in the answer choices with the exact terminology/referrred to thing

good score but ttiming was from 16 sec - 1.19 min over...

@GordonGianadda ooo this is very helpful thank you

@EFlat10 it does thank you!!

Oops, missed the "reject" part of the question -- definitely will be specifically highlighting that in the question stem moving forward as to not make the same mistake again

It really helped from the previous lessonn knowing that if the stem says "agree/disagree" it''s likely to be more explicit vs. "suggest/support" (implicit)

im getting this, im not sure if I'm getting it but im getting it

yay! taking a moment to distinguish premise and conclusion was def helpful to avoid the trap

this one was def a bit trickier but as I relied on the pattern of the Q and indicators it def helped me get the right answer within the right time

@tarapg2901 Imo,, if you ask "why" or "how do we know", there's no information within the stimulus telling us how the penalty won't change behaviour. What the stimulus does tell us though is that the information from the trial has still led to useful info (which the last sentence/premise details)

Personnally I found the third quesiton quite chalenging because in my mind the conclusion for the author's argument was that we need the scientists investigation before we can use the facility

• Is it right to assume that my error here was that I didn't delve further into the "why" the author wants the investigation in the first place?