I have been scoring very consistently (plus or minus1) around a score that I am very happy with for a month and a half now, but yesterday, on my last planned practice exam, I just completely bombed the RC section, resulting in a score a whole 7 points before my average. I knew it while I was in the test. It felt like my short term memory was just gone all of a sudden. LR sections were consistent with my past performance, but I don't really understand what was going on with RC. Has anyone else experienced this sudden lapse in short term memory? It felt very specific, because, as I said, LR felt solid. Any thoughts on how to prevent this on the real thing next week?
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
I believe B only directly counters the opponents' explanation under the assumption that households with multiple incomes have higher average incomes than households without multiple incomes. I did not see any good reason to make this assumption, Can anyone explain what I'm missing here?
Hang on a second. Don't we only need to assume that "only those who had venereal diseases ingested mercury"? Then, It seems that the argument still works if everyone in Beethoven's time ingested mercury, as long as everyone in Beethoven's time also had a venereal disease. Seems ridiculous based upon our outside knowledge, but for the sake of this argument, is this not technically correct?
If I'm right, it seems like Necessary Assn questions are more like "most nessecary assn" contrary to what JY says. I've seen other NA questions that seem to have a hole like this as well. Any thoughts?
Can someone explain question 25? The passage never says that Narrative Training "tends" to avoid the relativism. It only says that it "need not" have the relativism. I thought that the gap from "A is prepared for future dilemmas" to "A is insulated from the shocks of future dilemmas" was more reasonable than the gap between "X need not Y" and "X tends to not Y." So I picked A