Also interested. Presently studying 3-4 hours a day

Question 10 Help: Ok. I struggled for almost an hour on 10 because I could not for the life of me understand why Mr White could not make weed or cook meth. The answer is that he can but he can also choose to not. The reason being that /LSD tells us that Mr White can cook meth. But that does not mean he will for sure cook meth, he could still choose not to for a variety of outside reasons, all we know is that he has the capacity to do so if he wanted. We know that /LSD is the necessary and meth is the sufficient. We also know because of rule number 2 that knowing the necessary does not tell us info about the sufficient. To reiterate, the absence of LSD does not provide us with direct info about the state of the sufficient conditions (such as the cooking of meth). In essence, while /LSD allows Mr. White the option to cook meth, it does not mandate that he will. His actual decision to cook meth is determined by factors beyond the absence of LSD synthesis capability.

I like to remind myself that improvement is inevitable with constant effort. Just keep swimming everyone!

Some of these lessons are less linguistically convincing than others.

Range - at least one lesson, possibly all of them though

I feel like this invites us to make assumptions about things because they seem similar... seems like there is a lot of potential here for misusing this and make a logical fallacy in your thinking

Haven't got a single question wrong w/ PSAs! UNDEFEATED

Part of the reason that I chose the right answer was for different reasons than what JY listed. The correct AC is less limiting bc we aren't only talking about small children, we are also talking about 'others' and that was one of the reasons I dismissed the special obligations answer choice because it did not fully apply to the group we are trying to keep from known harm that consumes these peaches in larger amounts

October study group!

I read it as /A --> ADP (No Americans attended Dictator's party)

The contrapositive would then be /ADP --> A (If you did not attend dictator's party, you are american)... Is this alright?

Sooo we have eliminated D/E for 'many' and A/B for the use of 'most' and got it right by POE then?

After some consideration, I realized that B is correct bc 'must' is a positive necessary indicator so the order of things is taste good --> right amount of flour

This is a W, team

The reason i overlooked it is bc i thought that bit about the drug was a throwaway sentence. Today I have learned there are basically no throwaway sentences in logical reasoning

"You are prolly not mapping this on paper and just seeing this in your mind's eye" ............ no comment

For Q8, I am not sure I understand why receive is being used. The question states "In countries with nationalized healthcare insurances, no one who requires emergency medical treatment is denied that treatment" then one comes to the conclusion require -> receive... However, just because one is not denied treatment does not mean it is given... So I really think the word should be changed to require --> offered (because there is no guarantee that they will receive treatment). Unless I am misunderstanding something? #feedback

If we are reading from sufficient to necessary, then Q7 should read /paytax -> /operate, right? #feedback

If this helps - the way I see it, lawgic language is always moving from sufficiency to necessity in these examples

what

I feel dumb and will try again tomorrow. Kumar and I are not friends.

Mine: If Hannah consumes enough energy drinks, then she will have the strength to study

If - Indicator

E - Energy Drinks; S - Strength to Study

E -> S

/S -> /E which means that Hannah will have no strength to study if no energy drink consumption occurs

I am in chicago! Living in the hyde park area and down to study together :) dm me

Contrapostives: The same/OG sentence as the supporting but flipped

Negation: Introducing the / (deny the OG sentence)

I needed this W after that last question

I got it but I understood it as cost of living goes down --> people live downtown --> profits increase and then wrote a separate rule that says if congestion --> profits will not increase because I did not see how I could know where congestion fits in the chain because /congestion needs to come first before profits can increase right? #help

I understand the question is wrong but if you have atl 250 how could it not be self sustaining?