Count me in please message me.
I would check out the webinar on this topic (and STR) super helpful breakdown!
This is so dope! Thanks for setting us up for the real deal!
I love the blind review option however, anyone else notice that the answer you selected during the set is darker than the other four bubbles? Not helpful for BR. @alan-91620
Has anyone had issues with one section of an exam glitching to where the answers appear to be moving from left to right? I experienced this during a PT on Sunday, the first RC section was fine but when I moved on to the second section of LR the first three questions were glitching. Unfortunately I couldn't continue to take the practice exam like that. Was using safari on MacBook. PT #62.
@cowings17735 thank you for the recommendations. I created e-flashcards on Quizlet but I think linking the argument form to real questions will be very helpful, to learn and reinforce.
thanks for the tip!
Does anyone have recommendations for supplemental materials in reviewing valid and invalid argument forms?
I started the sufficient lesson today however I realized I need to go back and review the prior lessons. I did not locate a 7sage webinar on validity, any suggestions in addition to reviewing the valid and invalid lessons?
All, thank you for sharing your thoughts and thank you for posting @jbaron0907126.B. JD ASAP as it sounds that we are in a similar situation (work FT, familiar with LSAT).
I also started studying (again) in late February 2019, after taking a few months off after studying with BP last year from 03/2018 to 10/2018. I am barely on negation in the Some/Most Relationships section of the curriculum and second guess myself about going too slow as well. I'm having to relearn or retrain myself as this curriculum is much more thorough, which I definitely need to have a concrete understanding.
@jkjohnson1991823 Apple podcasts the specific episode referenced above is titled "#2 - AMA 7 Sager Accounts Playable 150s to 174 LSAT" #ripnip
This is a common question and I've heard and read that if you focus on improving your accuracy, your time per question will naturally decrease as strategies become second nature. So, you may consider doing the problem sets without the time pressure while you improve accuracy.
The last sentence states that all of the side effects of RBST "can be kept under control with constant veterinary care, but such levels of veterinary help would cost big farms far less per cow than they would small farms."
At this point we have the basics on what RBST is, its impacts on cows, that veterinary care may mitigate the impacts, and that it's less expensive for big farms to to get vet help than for small farmers.
Before reading the answer choices, we may anticipate that BST is too expensive for small farms due to vet care needed, in comparison to large farms.
The government approval part of E isn't what the argument is developing just a detail to the answer, it is not the main subject of answer choice E.
E states that if the gov't were to approve BST use, big farms would benefit more than small farms. E is correct because it is the most supported by the developing argument in the passage, it is the conclusion that ties up the previous statements in the passage.
This was a question that I skipped during PT and gained in BR. Reviewing it now this question is challenging and a bit confusing because we are choosing a flaw to strengthen the sociologist's argument because the whole to part or composition flaw highlights why the romantic's argument is not right, thus supporting the the sociologist. I also thought this was a strengthen question, not a sufficient assumption question. Will star this to review further.
@beezmoof JY didn't list the first sentence as a premise but I did diagram this as a premise when trying the problem, as follows:
Science → / Explain emotions
Everything after "such as" in the first premise defines what the emotional phenomena are but it's not crucial in this problem because neither frustration, love, or being moved by a painting is used in the rest of the argument. It's just there for context and to throw people off. They're not even listed in the AC's.
The following sentence starts with referential phrasing, "Since they" so the first sentence supports the last because without it, we don't know what "they" is (emotional phenomena).
So before you try to identify the SA, the diagram is as follows:
(first sentence) Science → / Explain emotions
(first part of second sentence "SINCE" indicator) Emotions → /explained by PCN
(CONC.) Emotions → /phys. phenomena
We may draw a valid conclusion (using valid argument form #6)
/explained by PCN ←s→/phys. phenomena, take the contrapositive to the get the right answer:
E) Phys. phenomena --> explained by physics, chemistry, etc.