Hi, I am interested if this is still available

Thank you for taking the time to explain. I understand why C cannot be correct now and why D is correct

Why is it not C?

How did you practice? did you drill a lot?

Not able to get the score for my RC drill. Only seeing buttons to do questions, track time and stop time

I was in between B and E and realized B is SC NC mix up. B is putting the premise (polls good indication) in the conclusion (NC spot) and B is also putting the conclusion (McGuinness) in the premise SC spot

Problem resolved-thank you

Thank you

I like the way you explained it

I am getting that E presents a third alternative cause? Can I correctly say that? Just making sure I get it since I got this wrong

Hope this helps

C says if /more than 25% then not funded

We just do not have info on this based on the stimulus

De Morgan's Law is for conjunctive conditionals and it says put a negation on each item and turn the "and" into "or" in the SC when you are doing the contrapositive

The rule falls away when you fail the SC

The rule implemented when you affirm SC

The rule falls away when you affirm the NC

The rule implemented when you fail the NC

By concluding that it will be funded , is failing the NC, so you run the contrapositive. Since we know the proposed area studies department will duplicate more than 25%, we leave that alone or push up to domain and we deal with only thing left--which is the less than 50%---when you contrapose less than 50% you get not less than 50%

Also if you fail one part of a conjunctive SC, you are failing the SC as a whole and the rule falls away

MSS has the conclusion in the answer choices. It is pulled from the passage and placed into the answer choices. The passage will support it

Not sure for PAI, so far it seems like each person has a conclusion

I think JY points comparatives out to make us aware of them and the thing they are being compared on/point of comparative.

C is correct and it is a comparative statement since it compare f science fiction against conventional fiction on the quality of more of a promise of social criticism

The main point and main conclusion are the same

But, in the stimulus/passage there can be a complex argument structure where you have a sub-conclusion/major premise that supports the main conclusion

Yes, right answer will paraphrase the MP and/or use referential phrasing to point back to the MC

If I recall correctly, I believe the q-stem will say something along the lines of if the following is true then-basically telling you to take the answer choices as true

The original statement is: No pilots are blind

p-->/b

Yes, negated it is saying that some pilots are blind

When you add, "it's not the case to the original statement...you get it's not the case that no pilots are blind. Meaning some pilots are blind

Negated this turns to; pb

Some pilots are blind.

A Contrapositive is a logically equivalent statement;

C--->F

/F--->/C

All cats are furry

If its not furry then it is not a cat

A negation is a contradiction

Dogs are cute

It is not the case that some dogs are cute/Some dogs are not cute

D-->C

D some /C

Hope this helps

The lower boundary of some is 1 and the upper boundary is 100 (all), all is a point (100), so if anything some can include all but all does not include some

So when they say some, they can mean at least 1 or all

"some not" is 0-99, at least one student cannot read. Possibly all students cannot read

Whole to part flaw present here

it assumes the quality of the whole (university department) also applies to the parts (staff)

#help admin - I clicked on the Causation v. Conditional link and keep getting, " Error Page not found" message

Then it says this in fine print:

We are sorry but the page you are looking for does not exist.

Return to the homepage or search using the search box below

The rule for Group 3 is to pick either idea, negate it and then make it the sufficient condition.

You can pick HWA as your idea to negate and it will look like this

/HAW-BO

If heat waves are not abated then blackouts occur

Disney-Tigers-Trash Bin

Disney-can draw an inference that it must be true that Walt went with the goat option since he did not visit Goofy.

Tigers-not as supported as Disney's argument but still some direct support.

Trash bin- weaker than Tigers' argument because there is room for speculation

Not all alcohol is bad. After all, wine made from purple grapes contains antioxidants that provide cardiovascular benefits.

All members of the P community can choose to a part of the annual holiday festival by either paying a fee to attend or helping to set up the day before and partake in clean up after. Mr. C did not help to set up the day before nor did he clean up after, yet he attended. Therefore, Mr. C must have paid the fee.

Z is a dog that likes to sleep soon after he has eaten. The food in his dog bowl was eaten and Z was found on a rug near by asleep. I believe that Z ate the food.