Discussions

brianleesh2910

Joined: Apr 2025
Subscription: Free

PrepTests ·

PT103.S3.Q18

brianleesh2910

Saturday, Jul 06 2019

#help

I don’t like this question.

I thought the discrepancy is that when there is no parasite, there are healthier stingrays although the environment is polluted.

So I picked (C) which states that parasites harm their hosts. Although the environment is polluted, parasites affect the hosts negatively. Therefore the effect of pollution is offset by the effect of non-existence of parasites. The parasites could even harm stronger than does pollution to the hosts. So without parasites, stingrays are healthier even if the environment is polluted.

I admit that I made an assumption about how strong each effect would be. Also it’s too obvious that parasites negatively affect their hosts?

However, even the correct answer choice is making a huge assumption. With (A), we can explain that parasites don’t exist in polluted areas. However, how do stingrays manage to survive and even be healthy in the contaminated environment? Doesn’t this answer also assume that the negative effect of pollution is less than the negative effect of parasites? If pollution is so

severe that it overwhelms the positive effect of non-existence of parasites, how would you say (A) resolved the discrepancy?

PrepTests ·

PT106.S3.Q13

brianleesh2910

Saturday, Jul 06 2019

#help

I cannot pick an answer between D and E because they all seem reasonable to me.

I read all the comments and it seemed weird becaue they describe the same logic for (D) & (E) but say (D) is wrong but (E) is right.

You guys are saying

D: Some warm blooded species dont have dense blood. But what about our prehistoric birds?

E: Some cold blooded species have a gene which causes dense blood and growth rings. So correct.

However, (E) is also about some cold blooded species and not directly mentioning that it's our prehistoric birds! So it seems like (D) and (E) having the same logic. But why do you guys pick (E) as the answer?

I thought (D) has reason because the only premise given to support warm blooded is dense blood vessels and if we aren't sure of "DBV -> WB", we cannot guarantee that the prehistoric birds are warm blooded. So we wrecked the premise supporting warm blooded. However, the reasoning to support cold blooded remains intact so we can resolve the dispute in favor of cold blooded.

PrepTests ·

PT107.S1.Q15

brianleesh2910

Monday, Jun 24 2019

#help

I didn’t choose (A) because it seems to assume that people use treatments for every sickness. If some ordinary mountain sickness patients and cerebral edema patients don’t use treatments (maybe hoping to be cured naturally), Cerebral edema can be still more dangerous even if you negate (A).

PrepTests ·

PT105.S2.Q11

brianleesh2910

Monday, Jun 17 2019

#help

J.Y. says (E) doesn’t need “frequently” but needs “sometimes”. However, I thought “frequently” would mean “often”, which means “sometimes”.

Does “Frequently” mean “most”? What about “often”?

PrepTests ·

PT103.S2.Q19

brianleesh2910

Monday, May 06 2019

#help

“Human beings in certain situations react to unpleasant stimuli with violence - but only because they are conditioned by their culture to react in this manner.”

I think (E) is based on this last sentence but I don’t see how the last sentence supports (E). All the last sentence says is, “Reacting to unpleasant stimuli with violence is because of culture.” However, what (E) says is “Violence is a product of culture.” Here is the problem. Reacting to unpleasant stimuli with violence is not the same as violence. It is just one subset of violence. There could be still a lot of violence other than reacting to unpleasant stimuli with violence. Since (E) is talking about all “Violent behavior”, it’s not guaranteed at all!

Any thoughts?

General

•

Thursday, May 02 2019

brianleesh2910

How do you deal with the questions you got wrong on the course?

Hi 7sagers!

Today was my bad day! I had a lot of questions wrong on the course.

I used to just make it sure that I understood why I was mistaken for wrong questions and why the correct answer choices were correct.

But I honestly think it’s less likely through this way that I will get such questions right next time I happen to revisit them.

So I wonder if you guys have any good methods to review difficult questions or important lessons on the course.

I am also curious if you ever solve the questions you got wrong on the course again and if you do, how!

PrepTests ·

PT101.S3.Q20

brianleesh2910

Thursday, May 02 2019

#help

I didn’t like the word “impossible” in (B). Was it impossible for the directors to spend the funds only on the cause? I rather thought they could, because they could spend the funds only on the cause and then choose not to spend the rest. It was their will to spend the rest, and it proves that spending the funds only on the cause was not “impossible”.

PrepTests ·

PT102.S2.Q23

brianleesh2910

Wednesday, Apr 17 2019

#help

“Only if the government steps in and provides the homeless with housing will this problem disappear, and this necessitates increased taxation.”

How can I know if “this” here means “the government steps in and provides housing?” I thought “this” meant “problem disappears”.

PrepTests ·

PT106.S1.Q23

brianleesh2910

Friday, Apr 12 2019

#help

I don’t understand how C weakens the argument. C says “Frontal lobe activity is not subject to variation the way general disposition is.” In other words, frontal lobe activity is not affected by general disposition. All it implies is general disposition does not cause frontal lobe activity. Then, it blocks the opportunity that the alleged causal relationship might be reverse. It’s a typical strengthening statement!

PrepTests ·

PT107.S4.Q9

brianleesh2910

Wednesday, Apr 10 2019

#help

What does “the cost of equipment to heat homes with oil has fallen sharply” in D have to do with weakening when we are talking about people who already switched to oil, thus already bought the equipment?