This question is the same difficulty as the last one, yet this one felt 10 times easier for me somehow.
I got this question wrong for the dumbest reason, I forgot about the laws of supersets and subsets. (E) says none of the candidates already works for Arvue, which would mean that none of the fully qualified candidates work for Arvue. Somehow I forgot about this rule.
Well I'm not a crook, I've earned everything I've got.
If this is a 4 star art passage I don't even wanna know what a 5 star art passage looks like
I'm not a crook.
If a question asks for "main point" instead of "main conclusion" does that mean the same thing?
Based on recent tests and how 7sage grades question difficulty, does anyone know what the average (mean) question difficulty would be around? My guess would be around 3 (medium) but I am curious if anyone knows for sure.
Can't you also translate "If a resident lives in a building with more than ten units, then either she has an inalienable right to keep a pet or she has not kept that pet openly and notoriously." to
"If a resident lives in a building with more than ten units and does not have an inalienable right to keep a pet then she must not have kept that pet openly and notoriously"
Can anyone tell me if my reasoning makes sense?
since it is required that the solutions are economically enticing, it wouldn’t be possible for any ecological problems to be solved. So the fact that few can be solved (conclusion) without economic enticement, means it must be the case that those few that are solved have to be a result of government mismanagement, since none can be solved without economic enticement that are not a result of government mismanagement.