I hate this one..

I have a hard time understanding this. Since when were we able to directly attack the premise?

This question really threw me off. I understand why B is right. But I'm still wondering why A is wrong. "important factors determining stamp's value, assuming it is in good condition, are its rarity and age" sounds very vague. Does it mean older one is more valuable? Can't it also mean newer one is more valuable depending on assumptions we take?

If I were to give another example, we can also say that "important factor determining a used-car's value is its age." In this case, wouldn't we assume that newer the car is more valuable one? So I don't think we can assume older one is more valuable just by the stimulus' word "age." So that's why I chose A, the older a stamp is, the more valuable it is to fill the gap that "age" makes a stamp more valuable when it is "older," not "newer." Can anyone correct me? Thanks!

I don't get this. The author is not rejecting the Sigerson's argument but saying that the proposal is "dishonest." I know there should be additional assumptions, but if Sigerson's proposal applies only to the future conduct of city politicians, doesn't that make the proposal even more "dishonest?" Because he's being a jerk who would say like, "I've been getting the funds from such companies and none of you guys will from now on." Please correct me. Thank you!

My explanation might be much simpler than what JY has provided. Please correct me if I'm wrong though!

In A, just read "Anything that exists would continue to exist" and forget the rest. Why? Because "Even if" does not seem to make any conditional arrow at all.

ex) If it rains, I will go to museum = R --> M

Even if it rains, I will go to museum. = I will go to museum if it rains. I will also go to museum if it doesn't rain.

According to the stimulus, Universal loss of belief --> $ does not really exist

Answer choice A says exist --> continue to exist. Contrapositive will be not continue to exist --> does not exist. So they seem to match.

This is one of the hardest, but one of the most brilliant questions!!

Never knew JY can sing lol

@ said:

@ said:

@ said:

did anyone else find this one extremely hard minus logic games?

I did. LG was cake, but RC was very rough.

During time I actually didn't do so well on LR, but once I looked it all over I thought LR was pretty easy and I was just having a crappy LR day. But RC was no joke lol

i got 16 and i usually get 21-23 right on RC!!! could not believe it/ WRECKED me

I did LG well, but messed up way too bad on LR and RC and scored the lowest of the year... And I'm taking one next week. While I'm discouraged a bit, I tried to be optimistic because I withdrew this particular exam the day before the date. So lucky for me, haha.

I chose C because it sounded reasonable enough. But the word "larger" in answer choice C was extremely confusing because the stimulus used the word "high." I guess they're interchangeable..

I should've invested in Tesla back in 2010 or something lol

I eliminated A because I assumed that high-speed limit leads to more fatalities.

But I also chose C because I assumed that if there's more automobile traffic, there should be decreased fatalities because cars are going slow :D