Subscription pricing
Hi! I'm PT'ing 170-174 and am posting to ask if anyone else who consistently scores above 170 would like to have a 30 minute 1-on-1 Zoom call with me, in which we can take turns presenting the most valuable insights we've had in our studies so far. These insights can be general or specific-- whatever has helped you most!
I've completed the core curriculum and so personally would like to use our Zoom call as an opportunity to discuss insights outside the core curriculum. There will probably be a little bit of repetition/overlap, but let's mostly try to break new ground!
I can spend about 1/2 hour presenting the following:
Message me personally if you're interested and we can set up a time! In your message, feel free to let me know what you've been scoring and maybe give a super brief preview of what you might want to present.
Best of luck to everyone in their studies! :D
This post explains the following very important principle: if you want to argue that "Jim can dunk because he's tall," you first have to support the idea that "Jim is tall." The rest of the post applies said principle in the context of the 'Japanese collectors' problem.
The problem with J.Y.'s justification:
J.Y. doesn't explain, based on answer choice C, the logical reasoning that supports the notion that the Japanese collectors actually are preferential towards the aesthetic qualities of the European impressionist art. This is an essential first step because the only way to conclude that "the Japanese collector's made their purchase due to the fact that they were preferential towards the aesthetic qualities of the art," one must first establish that the Japanese collectors actually are preferential towards the aesthetic qualities of the art. It's like saying, "Jim can dunk because he's tall," without ever supporting the notion that Jim is tall in the first place.
What J.Y. should have also said
The reasoning that supports that the Japanese collectors actually are preferential towards the aesthetic qualities of the art is correlational reasoning. Answer choice C says that [multiple] Japanese prints all contain certain aesthetic qualities and that Japanese people esteem these prints. In other words, there is a correlation between A) a print having these certain aesthetic qualities, and B) Japanese people esteeming the print. This positive correlation strengthens the notion that, if a print contains these aesthetic qualities, Japanese people will esteem the print.
Recall that some examples of European impressionist art have these same aesthetic qualities (answer choice C tells us this). Using the causal logic described above, we can now conclude that, the Japanese people must esteem these examples of European impressionist art. Furthermore, the causal logic described above implies that the Japanese people esteem these examples of European impressionist art because the art contains those certain aesthetic qualities mentioned before. In other words, the Japanese collectors actually are preferential towards the aesthetic qualities of the European art. In terms of my 'dunking' analogy, what I just strengthened was the notion that "Jim is tall." In turn, this strengthens the conclusion that "Jim can dunk because he's tall."
An important reminder
Answer choice C doesn't support the argument such that the conclusion is necessarily correct. In fact, even when you assume that the information in answer choice C is correct, the argument is still really weak. All answer choice C does is slightly strengthen the argument by supporting the idea that 'Jim is tall.' Only then does it even make a little bit of sense to conclude that 'Jim can dunk because he's tall.'