The question is relying on two assumptions.

1. even though the reservoirs and streams are filled this will be enough and there is not like a crazy amount of people living in the area or population is not expected to grow substantially.

2. We can get this water to people.

C is attacking assumption 2

I got this wrong because I was hoping it attacked assumption 1. when it did not E was my panic choice. I thought hmmm maybe there is a lot of water now but we could experience a lot less water in the coming months so we still need to ration our water.

Yet, while maybe weakens a little I have to assume this year is the same as the last. So, it's not very strong to begin with. Still let's assume it does have a lot less compared to other years....still then we don't know maybe the reservoirs and streams already have enough even if we received no more water.

C directly weakens the question because everything in E that I assumed could be true and that wouldn't matter because we can't even get the water to the people.

Something being sufficient for an outcome does not guarantee the outcome. We could be forgetting something that impedes the outcome.

@RachelMeltsin I had a really hard time picking A bc that was my initial thought but no other answer was better (This is a life saver, don't understand why but nothing is better? You have to pick and go for the one you have a little doubt on). After a lot of thought on this one I feel like A is not telling us they did not stimulate VNO (it has to say that it did not stimulate VNO to be attacking/contradicting the premise) it's just saying that VNO was not the only cell stimulated.....I don't like JY explanation because it makes it sound like it was not stimulated.

I think A says that It could be true that it was stimulated, we keep that as true BUT perhaps stimulating it does nothing so it is not functioning. Instead what is functioning is the OTHER cells that are stimulated which is causing the incorrect assumption that it is the VNO cells.

But isn't "Fully" strong?

I have found that when we only know one side of a bilateral group (Two sides) this is bad we don't want to guess what the second group thinks or wants. If we notice this in the stimulus this is bad and if a answer choice points that out consider it!!!

@MaxThompson

This is why I chose C because I felt like the author did not LOVE either and saw kind of flaws specifically, he speaks more highly about cosmopolitanism than Nativism. We can see in paragraph 3 that he is like "yes go Cosmopolitanism such profound influence and boldness and this is like but then we return to nativism and it's all calmer". I don't see the same kind of energy about nativism that's why I went with C can you explain where my train of thought is wrong?

What is a good general take away? with almost every question I do I try to have a general take away that will help me with all answer questions not just this one. With MSS I seem to struggle because they are all different how can you generalize one question in MSS to all

Could I join?

This would be a double negative right? couldn't I change that to just "Like that of anthropologist"?

DO NOT.... I REPEAT>>> DO NOT convince yourself that a question is right and half butt read the following answers just to say you "read the rest of the answers" but immediately delete it with no thought on what it even says just because you think you found the answer

FOR THOSE FEELING DISCOURAGED!!!! I have been studying for a year now (on and off). When I did this for the first time it took me 5 minutes and I got it completely wrong and even after watching the video I was still unsure how to do the conditionals on my own. Fast forward to now while my timing is still at 2:02 minutes instead of the target 1:43, I was able to do it right and get the answer correct!!! I promise it's the small steps, one day at a time. It's a little accomplishment and while I'm not completely there yet, knowing and seeing the improvement is so rewarding. Keep going, we're all in this together!

What kind of question is this? Would it be Most strongly supported?

What is the point of the logical negation again? Especially when we understand the contrapositive. At first I was confused because I thought it was the same thing but not i understand it’s different yet I don’t understand what’s the point of learning logical negation. Can someone explain?

Does this apply to other group one indicators like every or any?

Also a quick question, I see how paragraph four was confusing. My goal was to counter a perspective by saying we would not be able to adapt to different roles more easily but I understand how I gave too much of an example and it sounded too much like paragraph three. How can I go about making it better? How can I counter argue a perspective better?

Thank you so much!

Very helpful I truly appreciate the insight. You definitely pointed out things I didn't realize I was doing maybe I need to find a balance in a few areas. Thank you so much!

This is how I understand but not otherwise:

Basically stating not the sentence right before it.

For example

If Yoda trains him, Luke will become a Jedi

Otherwise

If Yoda does not train him, Luke will not become a Jedi

Here is my timed essay…. I know it’s far from perfect but I wanted to get feedback from everyone and admin if possible. There is a lot of spelling and grammar error but I used every second I had! I want to get better so please, any and all criticism is welcome!!

As an economics major and business administration major who attended a liberal arts program I have found it very valuable to not have been part of a curriculum that whose emphasis was not career preparations. While many colleges chose a course of study that had a much stronger carreer preparation curriculum and that worked out for some I witnessed how detrimental this was for their future when things didn’t pan out as they would have wished. Many students use college to find who they are and prepare for the future world outside of their carrer and switching away from a liberal arts education would only be stripping them away from theses essential parts of a undergraduate college education. While Career preparation is in fact essential for our future a curriculum that emphasizes only career preparation over everything else would be doing students a dissatisfaction.

College is a time where many students finally have the ability to explore who they are without being tied down by high school expectations or parents controlling who they are suppose to be. For many students being stuck in a world where they were never able to find out who they were college can be that space where they build their beliefs and characteristics for the first time. As perspective two shared “college provided the context in which I could reflect on my own values”. A liberal arts education allows students to learn about new things such as history, science, fine arts, economics, language, philosophy, and so much more. A curriculum that is fully focused on emphasizing carrer preparation would take this opportunity from students. A curriculum focused on career preparation can only work if the student knows who they are and what they want to be. otherwise while trying to help the student for their future carrer schools could be harming them preparing them for a career in which they will be unhappy because they were focused to choose something before they had a chance to understand what they enjoyed.

A liberal arts education can not only help us understand who we are but help us become better rounded individuals who are prepared fro the future. How can we prepare for the future if we don’t know or understand from our historical mistakes or triumphs? In a world in which we spend a very large time of our life outside of our career Its very important to also know how to interact and live outside of our carrers. A liberal arts education can prepare us for life. A simple but strong example that comes to mind is one that involves the career I want to hold one day. As I sat in a court room listening to a case for a paper I was going to write in class, as I took notes, I heard the attorney questioning an expert. Everything seem to go well until the attorney asked the expert if by any chance a liquid could have gone up due to gravity. The whole room went silent and a few smiles and chuckles were held back by many. That’s when I first relized that we need to be able to have an understanding of different concepts not just our carrer. As an economics major I have found myself frustrated by many peoples inabiility to understand things such as inflation, how price and demand works, or the way government policies and decisions happen. I have first hand seen the way that not being a well rounded individual can have an impact in your daily actions, thoughts, and decisions. Having a college carrer in which we simply emphasize career preparation would worsen these type of situations. We would strongly be doing students a dissatisfaction by taking a more career preparation approach.

Many along with those who agree with perspective 1 might argue that schools who recognize the need for a career preparation focused education are equipping and adapting students for career paths that are adaptive to changing job roles. In opposition to this I believe that by focusing on a career focused curriculum we would be doing the complete opposite. Take for example an engineer who spent his entire career focused on chemical engineering. While a very good career in which career focused preparation is definitely essential for a successful career it is not what many might consider an adaptive role. In an education in which most of his classes were science and math focused the individual would be little prepared to perhaps change into a leadership role or be able to run a chemical business. while possible it would take time and would be harder as they were never prepared or taught the basics of working and leading people. They were never taught the basics of finances or how a company works. A liberal arts educations would not only equipt them with the basics of be able to switch roles in the future but would make them better rounded in all aspects of life. Leading to a balance in both a career and int heir everyday life.

While it is undeniable that many attend college to prepare for a career and that career preparation is essential for a successful job, colleges should not limit students by making the choice of what’s important. A liberal arts college allows students who need to find who they are to be able to do that while having those students who are ready for a more career preparation carriculum to focus on taking classes that are more related to their career. Students can make their own choice and colleges are not the ones who should be making that change as it could be deteremetnal to the students future. Not only limiting their future career paths and opportunities but also limiting their knowledge for their everyday life ahead of them. That’s why colleges should not focus on a career preparation focused carriculam as it would care more harm than good.

#feedback