I definitely can see how (B) is a NA, but to me it seems like (E) is also a NA.
If we negate (E) we get:
"Most candidates policy proposals are NOT grounded in an overarching idealogical scheme".
If we can't link a philosophical attack to an idealogical scheme MOST of the time, then we break the chain and it's of no use most of the time. If it's not relevant most of the time, then how can it still be more effective generally?
We don't! But we also don't know if it IS or not. The whole argument rests on the assumption that it is. That's why its the NA. Hope that helps!
I'm really struggling with Q25 here...
Immediately prior to the reference to social workers, Bentham concedes that some social interests (specifically us wanting to be able to speak without hesitation to a priest in a confessional) might override our desire for relevant evidence.
From here, the author asks "why not also protect things we tell social workers? (or parents and their kids? etc.). It seems like they are saying that it's a problem that we grant exceptions to the non-exception rule based on social interests.
With all of that in mind, (A) sounds like it's a reversal of what the author is trying to say. It seems like they are trying to say that the application of an exception to the non-exclusion principle is questionable here.
What am I missing? #help
Ignore this... I totally missed what was stated in the first sentence lol.
(E) turns out to be the correct ac because all of the others are pretty bad, but it doesn't seem that the conclusion 100% follows if (E) is true. We don't actually know if Well's book is a great novel.
The stimulus says:
Well's book possesses something (compelling characters) that great dramatic novels have and science fiction generally lacks
So basically this says
great dramatic novel → compelling characters
This doesn't actually say that if you have compelling characters, you are a dramatic novel. It doesn't seem we can actually prove that it is dramatic with what the stim says without a mistaken reversal. Seems more of a PSA question.
Am I right about this or am I missing something?
#help
On question #10:
I struggled to choose between (A) & (B). Going into the ac's, I pre-phrased the answer to be something like "a rule established by the law". I eliminated everything but (A) and (B), but ended up picking (B) because the language seemed to imply that it was an actual definitive rule, while (A) seemed to indicate it was not as "strong" as a rule but instead just a principle. I did not make the connection that (B) was referring to the concept addressed in paragraph 2. Once you make the connection between ac (B) and paragraph two, it's clear that (A) is correct. But in the moment the looseness of the word "principle" vs "definition" threw me off. Am I the only one? lol
If you're like me, (A) might have tripped you up- but not because your conditional logic understand is weak. In fact, it might be because you focused on the conditional relationship too much.
We understand that:
Promise of yielding insights → Obligation to promote
And the contra:
Obligation to promote → Promise of yielding insights
Normally it's a game of "match the conclusion with one of our provable outcomes" with PSA's. Same here right? WRONG
Here, we are not asked to justify the ANSWER CHOICE that is supported by the principle (i.e. the principle proves the statement to be true). We are asked to justify the ACTION.
So for (A):
Given the conditional logic above can we prove that not funding is justified? NOPE.
I love this drawing J. You might have a future as a sketch artist. lol
Is it just me or are LR sections for 70's PTs riddled with terrible questions? I got this right by elimination, but wow this is just so bad.
I did the same thing haha. I think what ends up happening for me is that on the BR I read a lot slower and start to read more for content rather than structure which runs counter to the reading strategy needed to do well. I think I'm going to do my best to try and not slow down my reading speed as much on BR so help keep that focus on the big picture
I was struggling with this one too...
Let's say D is changed to be sufficient:
"If there is a behavior common to people of widely disparate cultures, then they are genetically predisposed to that behavior."
This statement claims that something Must Be True. The negation of Must Be True is Not Necessarily True. This means our negated statement is:
"If there is a behavior common to people of widely disparate cultures, then they are not necessarily genetically predisposed to that behavior."
This statement is not enough to destroy the original argument.
Additionally, the original statement is too strong. The identification of the emotion is just one type of common behavior. Do we need ALL common behaviors to be genetic for this to be true? Nope! we only need SOME to be true. If it's not required, it's not necessary.
Hope that helps!
I can see now in hindsight why (A) is correct, but I'm still struggling to accept that the term "Anarchy" shifted meaning.
Ctx: Anarchy defined as the absence of government.
P: Anarchy countenances chaos.
I don't see the above as a "shift" in meaning. Rather it seems like they are assuming either Anarchy or Absence of Gov't countenances chaos (an assumption rather than a change in definition).
Is there something I am missing here?? #help
#11- I'm still confused on why A is preferable over C.
From how I understood the passage definition of Inclusive Fitness Theory, the fact that the tadpole prioritizes passing along its own genetic makeup over its sibling's doesn't seem like it necessarily complicates the set of facts. It feels like that, if anything, helps support the idea that it Inclusive Fitness Theory merely expands the type of phenomena supported by natural selection.
What am I missing here?
#help (Added by Admin)
Is there a way to modify the "Date Taken" for PrepTest that you manually input your score for? I had some pen & paper preptests that I took prior to signing up for 7sage and I would like to be able to include them in my analytics without it making my most recent score go down. Otherwise, it just sets the date taken as the date you input the answers on 7sage. Any suggestions on how I can do this?
I feel like the difficulty of this passage is super underrated. #3 & #6 were the only questions I missed in this entire section. The last two passages were wayyy easier IMO. Am I the only one who feels this way?