What size does the photo that we upload have to be? Is it 2 x 2 inches (5 x 5 cm)?

Thanks!

How do you translate this rule...?

K is evaluated either at some time after M or at some time before T, but not both.

Thanks for the help!

Hi, I'm a bit confused with the rule "M and N cannot be selected together."

Is this a biconditional with never together always apart? so, M (--) ~N

Or do I use 'cannot' and think of it as group 4? so, M --> ~N

Which one would be correct?

Thanks for the help.

Can you guys explain PT 9 section 1 question 19?

it reads Editorial: It is clear that if this country's universities were living up to ~~~

I don't get why there is a conclusion indicator (it is clear) in the stimulus.For MBT, we only need premises to derive the must be true conclusion. Is it there just to confuse you?

Thanks

Hi, I'm confused with these statements. They refer to some kind of flaws, but can't seem to pinpoint exactly what they are.

Does anyone know what they're called?

1. The argument assumes without warrant that a condition under which a phenomenon is said to occur is the only condition under which that phenomenon occurs (in other words, the argument assumes that one way is the only way)

2. It sets up a dichotomy between alternatives that are not known to be exclusive. (in other words, the argument assumes a limited number of possibilities when there could be more)

.

"the author assumes one reason when others could be plausible"

Can you tell me the name of this flaw? Thanks in advance!

For Flawed Method of Reasoning section, Manhattan LR only talks about "mismatch between premises and conclusion" and "causation" whereas 7sage and Powerscore talk about many different types of recurring flaws.

I was just wandering why Manhattan chose to do so. Anybody has an idea?

"The editorial board of this law journal has written on many legal issues. Tom is on the editorial board, so he has written on many legal issues."

It sounds like a valid reasoning... Why is it flawed?

Thanks in advance!

I don't think we can draw any valid inferences from the following two statements, but Manhattan LR says we can (pg.412)

1. Some cars are sedans, and some cars are red.

2. Most children play sports, and some children play instruments.

But no, we can't draw any valid inferences from them right??

For the following statement "I only work on Tuesday," i translated it as Tuesday -> Work.. but I guess it's Work -> Tuesday.

Not sure why. "Only" is group 2 and introduces necessary condition (in this case, it's work). Did I get something wrong?

Thanks!

Hi, I know that there are many words that indicate what groups (universal quantifiers) you are in. Among them, where does the word "even if" belong to? Thanks.

Hey,

I know that there were lessons on denying existential quantifiers, but I couldn't find one for the universal quantifiers...

Can you please tell me how to deny statements with existential quantifiers?

Thanks