I didn't want to chose c because it was to on the nose but I don't know maybe I should have some more confidence.

@OmarAbuaita I just want to say I used this method on the next question and got it right so much faster. thank you for this

I tried to go fast and then I got it wrong and then I got it right on the br LOL

i second guessed myself 🥲

got it on the BR was between a and c, but a sounded so funky I picked c first

I got this one right; im so confused

I don't understand any of these questions at all.

what

im so confused its not even funny

I just don't get it someone please help

here's how I figured it out as someone who was confused: write out the conclusion and the premises that you see. in this case the conclusion was that microglia activity deteriorates cognitive facilities )I kicked Alzheimer's up into the domain) then the two premises is that it can be slowed by the acid and that the build up from protein causes the microglia to attack therefore impairing brain function. which of these two don't connect back to the premise/ isn't strong enough (yet) to go back to the premise? the acid premise and then I just looked in the answers for anything to strengthen that !

I wasn't too confident about this one but im glad it was right

?????????

why was this one easier than the last one lol

yeah that needed to be a 4 difficulty

5/5 !!!!

I got the two harder ones right -_-

I was struggling with this for a while but I think it finally clicked so I am leaving this here.

take the contrapositive if you are unsure. for example

-> The students who mastered logic saw improvements in their PrepTest scores.

my initial thought the first time was Improvements -> mastering test scores and I obviously got it wrong, so I looked up some examples on YouTube that helped

think of a red object if I were to write in lawgic:

color -> red, which would read as color is sufficient for red, now if I take the contrapositive /red->/color this idea can't be right, because if there's no red there is no color doesn't makes sense. it could be blue, orange, yellow, etc. now we do the opposite: red -> color, red is sufficient for color, take the contra positive: /color -> /red, if no color then it can't be red, now this makes more sense, right, because it's either there is color or not, there can be no substitutes.

now applying this to the example:

I took improvements -> mastering test scores took the contrapositive /mastering logic -> /improve, but this can't be true, because mastering logic can be substituted what if their test scores improved because of a tutor, maybe the teacher handed out extra credit, maybe covid 2027 came out and they could use chatgpt to answer everything idk all I know is that its not plausible to say just because this one thing did not happen does that mean that you did not improve.

now for the right answer:

mastering logic -> improvements

/improvements -> /mastering logic applying that same logic that I did for the wrong answer with the substitution could improvements have a substitute either than if they did or not? no of course not stagnant? not improved. decreased? not improve its either or, which means that improvements are required on mastering logic, but mastering logic isnt the ONLY thing to improve test score.

being a color is REQUIRED for a red object, but being a red object isnt the ONLY color for the object to be. I hope this helps someone!

I can't believe I got this right :0

I've never done this before so I was excited to test it out; I got it wrong, but I want to come back at the end of the module to see if I can apply what I learned to get right next time!

I came back and it was indeed much easier to figure out!

got all three again! but man I need to get my time down. perhaps later we can learn some strategies on how to eliminate questions quicker with accuracy!

woohoo it took longer than most, but I answered it correctly