User Avatar
jonrobertswork422
Joined
Apr 2025
Subscription
Free
User Avatar
jonrobertswork422
Wednesday, Jul 21 2021

This is just what I needed man.

User Avatar
jonrobertswork422
Sunday, Jun 20 2021

I'm still in the LR section of 7sage but I've read some on logic games in the Power Score Bible. Do you think it would be a good idea to still review with you without getting deeper into the curriculum?

User Avatar

Saturday, Sep 18 2021

jonrobertswork422

Just Got done with the LR portion of the CC, Now what?

I just finished the CC of the LR and want to further my understanding of the section. I don't think I am ready for timed practice just yet. My thinking of this is to just take the LR portions of old tests, or make my own mixed sets from the Problem Sets, but I've had a problem with the latter (making my own practice tests on 7sage). This was tedious and I couldn't save the practice tests I put together so I see that as a waste of time.

Let me know what you guys think I should do going forward because I could use the advise, thank you in advance.

PrepTests ·
PT102.S3.Q4
User Avatar
jonrobertswork422
Wednesday, Oct 06 2021

It seems to me that this is attacking the conclusion rather the relationship itself. We're told that this "ferrous material" is "hypothesized" to be the reason for the increase in Algae. Well this seems like the assumption I should be weakening as AC C addresses.

Yet, AC D is correct, which is directly attacking the conclusion. We are told this material caused the increase in algae. Then, if we are to be choosing AC D, we turn around and say, "No, actually there just was no increase in Algae". This seems to be going against how I was taught to approach these types of questions.

Please somebody explain to me how this isn't just getting a conclusion and simply saying, "No, actually that isn't right", rather than actually attacking the relationship between the premise and the conclusion.

User Avatar
jonrobertswork422
Thursday, Jul 01 2021

add me please!

Confirm action

Are you sure?