can someone please provide a straightforward concrete explain as to why b is incorrect I couldn't catch exactly why its wrong for this question

@ I am not currently Abel to access anything on the platform as anything I press has the 404 ERROR. Please do let me know when this will be fixed.

wait why am finally getting it now SLAY

I understood this very differently, I always try to approach things from the simplest perspective conditionally.

this is how I understood the stem and got the ac correct

the logic of the arg is

A -> more B than C (if parking citation then MORE during the school year (students are there) THAN when no students)

A -m-> B

(if u get a parking citation then its when students are in town) (MOST)

out of the answer choices ur just looking for a premise that says if a -> more B then C that then follows with a A -MOST-> B Conclusion

lets go literally the 2nd questions ive gotten correct from the NA section finally lol

I see how A is correct but do not understand why D is incorrect.

I was having trouble with NA questions so I watched Mike Kims tips/explanation of NA questions where he explained that at times the CAC for NA q's can introduce details that were not explicitly stated by the argument but none of the less th statement is necessary because it falls under the overarching gap/assumption made by the arg.

When D says says Neanderthals and prehistoric Homo sapiens ancestors of contemporary humans were completely isolated from each other geographically that play into the assumption that ancestors MUST HAVE genetic similarity to their later generations but in a wakers way.

Wouldn't E just be a weaker assumption than the overarching assumption made by the arg?

Im having lots of trouble with this.

If anyone would be able to explain that would be be apreciated!

im getting these questions right but its taking me 3-4 min LOL

in the most simplified way possible Iv'e come to understand NA as the fact that must the true for the argument to make sense could someone please confirm or deny wether this is a correct way to think about it?

watching this video literally just now made me realize why these questions are are called Sufficient assumptions because it literally what they are it just now clicked LOL.

I got he correct ac an this is how I understood it:

premise 1 : if you can see the authors social circumstances then you understand the true meaning of a statement

ASC -> TMS

premise 2: if you can see the social circumstance then you can understand the true meaning

SC -> TM

Smith does not understand the true meaning of her statements

S -> /TM

Based on premise 2 u can infer if smith does NOT understand the true meaning of her statements it's because she lacks insight into her own social circumstance.

hope this helps

I think u really jus need to focus on what the premises are saying and what the conditions are and what the conclusion is, once you've got that down u can realize why the conclusion was reached!

hope this helps!

when I first answered the question I initially choose D but switched to B. I understand now why B is incorrect and its on the basis of the verb/action used.

For harder SA question pay close attention to the action/verb used to describe the P -> C bridge because the WAC for harder SA questions will have the bridge built exactly the way it should but they will change the verb/action which makes it wrong bc in order to be right it has to refer exactly the action/intention stated in the argument! This mistake is subtle yet v wrong!

I got the correct answer in blind review AC a tripped me up but I ruled it out on the basis of the word "CAN" because we are seeking to make the argument logically valid making the conclusion 100% true and "CAN" is not strong enough its weaker it leaves room for the possibility for something else.

the way I have come to understand this type of flaw "psychological conclusion flaw" is the following:

if you are presented with a claim/conclusion mentioning:

"if other people believe X about A then they must also believe Y about A" can be flawed bc:

1. what u know vs what others know

if u are told about a certain belief people hold about something and then u are presented with a fact about that same thing U CANNOT infer that believe also believe what u just read/learned because its about the same thing.

U only know their one belief and thats it. U cannot infer another belief that someone holds just because u now know something related to the belief they hold!

2. what is IMPLIED vs. what id INFERRED

When u are told about a belief that someone holds about something and are presented with something that is implied of that very same thing U CANNOT INFER they also know believe in it just because it implied.

Just because something is implied u cannot infer that very same thing can be applied to something else merely because its implied.

I recognize this can be a bit abstract but I hope this helps!

Hi everyone!

Could someone please help me understand why answer choice E) is incorrect for an argument that has psychological flaw?

If someone could simply and plainly state why ad explain it would be much appreciates as the text lesson was unclear to me why this answer is incorrect!

Thank you!

#help

answer choice a stuck out like a sore thumb and it was my original choice but then I chose a diff answer I recalled in the previous lesson 1 yes we were told to approach it as a PSA question but also to not get caught up in finding a principle. I had wrongfully asumed answer choice A is incorrect on the basis of it solely being a generalized principle.

therefore when answer rule application SA questions is the CAC a generalized ruled that is inferred by the stimulus that it is applied?

#help

first drill ive gotten 5 out 5 from in a while !!!!

regarding wrong answer choice's on principle question are ALL comparative principles for an AC incorrect simply because they are comparative or u can only have a comparative principle as a correct answer choice if the specific example in the STIM is also comparative?

if anyone could please clarify that would be much appreciated!

#help

I would love to join as well! is there a link to a gc at all?

For this question type,

Since we complete the application of a rule to an argument by inserting a fact that triggers the sufficient conditions of the rule meaning that the missing piece of the rules application is a premise that states the sufficient condition of the rule, can it be inferred that for most of PSA(a) questions the conclusion is the necessary condition of the rule and thats why we must find a fact/premise that states the sufficient condition of the rule being met in order to complete its application and make the arguments whole?

example:

the sufficient condition of the rule is "knowingly enters a persons home without their permission"

and we are told in the conclusion : they have committed trespass (which is the necessary condition of the rule)

we must now find a fact that bridges the conclusion to the rest of the argument by adding a premise that TRIGGERS the sufficient condition of the rule to complete its application to the situation stated in the argument.

I hope what I am saying in concise and not to abstract or convoluted. If anyone can confirm or deny this that would be much appreciated!

#help #feedback

I got the answer correct but I reallyyyyy had to take my time with this one lol. This is definnetly a lot more difficult due to the verbiage used to express the terms and the intended message from it.

Does anyone have any tips regarding how to quickly understand HARDER worded passages in LR?

Would reading harder English texts when not studying help with this?

#help #feedback

on I the only one that also sees how this question type is similar to main point in a sense?

this video was easily the best explanation video on this platform

Hi I am interested in joining

hi im interested in joining, when is the first meeting?

#feedback #help how can I turn off the captions, there's no button on the video on my screen that allows me to switch it off, is there a shortcut on your keyboard to turn of the captions then? It's personally very distracting to me and I am not able to close them.