Discussions

User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Joined
Apr 2025
Subscription
Free
PrepTests ·
PT107.S1.Q15
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Saturday, Oct 05 2024

We are told that cerebral edema quickly becomes life threatening if not correctly treated from its onset. The conclusion then states that since the symptoms for both conditions are the same, cerebral edema is more dangerous at high altitudes. Why? Why does it follow that having the same symptoms means that cerebral edema is more dangerous?

It’s because with the same symptoms, we are going to (incorrectly) treat both conditions the exact same way. And we know that cerebral edema quickly becomes life threatening if not correctly treated treated from its onset. We know nothing about the fatality rate of ordinary mountain sickness, and also it doesn’t matter. We need to link the premise to the conclusion to make it make sense.

So if we negate A, and it’s true that the treatment for ordinary mountain sickness, which most people recover from, and the treatment for cerebral edema is the same, our argument is wrecked. We need to negate the answer and our argument needs to be wrecked in NA questions. If they’re both the same treatment, and they both can cure the condition, why would it follow that cerebral edema is more dangerous? It doesn’t.

0
PrepTests ·
PT107.S1.Q7
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Friday, Oct 04 2024

When I read answer choices, I re-word them so that it still captures the meaning of the answer choice, but in a way that makes sense to me. So I re-worded E to state "The skeptic failed to consider the possibility that Debbie's success in the three trials was due to a fairy godmother and not a coincidence."

The original answer choice said "something other than," so I substituted this with a factor that could fill in here, and is not a coincidence, because it's not a coincidence that you have a fairy godmother helping you do tricks.

Anyways, now that you know what E means, it doesn't work here. Our job is to pinpoint a flaw in the skeptic's reasoning, and E doesn't do that. The skeptic conducted these three trials (which did not adhere to the scientific method) and then said that Debbie must not use any of the three tricks he mentioned.

Even if it's true Debbie uses a fairy godmother and it's not just a coincidence she can pull off these tricks, how does that attack the skeptic's reasoning he used to get to his conclusion? It doesn't.

0
PrepTests ·
PT122.S1.Q20
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Thursday, Sep 26 2024

A states “Watching an exciting debate makes people more likely to vote in an election.”

In the stimulus, we are told about two kinds of people who watch debates: (1) people who are already committed and know who they are voting for and (2) people who don’t know who won or lost and are still uncommitted.

The conclusion tells us that winning a televised debate does little to help one win an election. A is wrong because it does nothing to attack this conclusion. If we pick A, the conclusion could still be true.

Let’s imagine a scenario where a candidate clearly won an exciting debate, and it is also true that watching that exciting debate made people more likely to vote. In this world with two kinds of viewers, that doesn’t mean anything. The committed viewers, who are more likely to vote, already know who they’re voting for. The uncommitted viewers are also more likely to vote, and they still don’t know who won (or who to vote for). So even with A being true, our conclusion could still be true: winning a televised debate does little to help one WIN an election.

0
PrepTests ·
PT112.S1.Q21
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Friday, Aug 23 2024

Some of these answers feel like pure B.S. I can admit when I’m wrong, but whoever decided that was the right answer choice has to be the wrong one here.

3
PrepTests ·
PT125.S4.Q21
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Saturday, Aug 03 2024

Process of elimination. You have to go through everything and cross out the answers that are not relevant/don’t make any sense/couldn’t possibly be true. Whatever you are left with has to be the right answer. Once you start doing POE and getting good at it, even if you at first don’t understand why the answer you’re left with is right, you’ll start to understand why after more practice.

1
PrepTests ·
PT126.S4.Q4
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Tuesday, Jul 30 2024

B is wrong because even if we concede that statement and take it to be true, and we say ok, it’s true that the passage that contains that unusual metaphor expresses an idea that bears little relation to any of the ideas expressed in Jordan’s book, that still says nothing about the metaphor itself. If B were true, it could still be true that Grey read Jordan’s book, plagiarized that metaphor, AND also came up with other new ideas Grey wanted to express in that passage.

Basically, B does not allow us to confidently say that Grey did not read Jordan’s book. In the world where B is true, Grey could have still read the book and just took that one metaphor. Answer choice A provides that alternative hypothesis that makes us seriously cast doubt on the conclusion that Grey must have read Jordan’s book.

0
PrepTests ·
PT120.S1.Q20
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Monday, Jul 29 2024

A is wrong because taking an interest in the well-being and doing all that you can to improve the well being are different things. You may not have an interest in something, but you could still do all that you can to improve it, perhaps because you are forced to.

2
PrepTests ·
PT155.S4.Q21
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Monday, Jul 29 2024

When we look at it as parts to a whole, we still get to the right answer. This is essentially a math question, and we’re trying to solve for what percentage of students in Pulham take night classes.

As a general math rule, you get a percentage by dividing the parts by the whole, then multiplying that by 100. But we don’t need to multiply by 100 here since we already are working with the percentages.

First, we have to take the sum of the parts (the percentage of students in Westerville who take night classes and the percentage of students in Pulham who take night classes), divide that by the sum of the whole (the two dorms), and equate that to 38%.

So we have (29 + X)/2=38

X=the unknown percentage of students in Pulham who take night classes.

Then we have 29 + X=76

X=47%

We’re left with choice A.

1
PrepTests ·
PT155.S4.Q21
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Monday, Jul 29 2024

When we look at it as parts to a whole, we still get to the right answer. This is essentially a math question, and we’re trying to solve for what percentage of students in Pulham take night classes.

As a general math rule, you get a percentage by dividing the parts by the whole, then multiplying that by 100. But we don’t need to multiply by 100 here since we already are working with the percentages.

First, we have to take the sum of the parts (the percentage of students in Westerville who take night classes and the percentage of students in Pulham who take night classes), divide that by the sum of the whole (the two dorms), and equate that to 38%.

So we have (29 + X)/2=38

X=the unknown percentage of students in Pulham who take night classes.

Then we have 29 + X=76

X=47%

We’re left with choice A.

1
PrepTests ·
PT101.S2.Q18
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Sunday, Jul 28 2024

I eliminated B as a possible answer choice because the question discusses the budget for the preservation of wetlands, and B discusses the salary of people who work on the preservation of wetlands. The budget for the preservation of wetlands (which could include various things, such as fences, signs deterring trespassing, etc.), could be separate from the budget for people who work on the preservation of wetlands. Basically, even if we concede that B is true, that those scientists have absurd salaries, it still doesn’t mean that the budget for the preservation of wetlands themselves is inadequate. Those budgets could be mutually exclusive.

In more concrete terms, think about the budget for healthy school lunches, and the budget for the salaries of school nutritionists who design healthy school lunches. These don’t have to be under the same budget. The budget for healthy school lunches could merely be budgeting for vegetables, fruits, lean meats, etc.

Also, B just doesn’t attack the support of the argument, which are the premises. The premises are telling us that the budget has increased but is still somehow inadequate. Why? It’s because the budget was pennies to begin with.

1
PrepTests ·
PT117.S2.Q13
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Wednesday, Jul 24 2024

#resolved!! 7sage said “You cannot run a contrapositive on some or most statements. This is because most x are y or some x are y are not conditional statements.

This problem has "unless" which introduces the conditional relationship. This problem introduces: Few x will be solved unless y. Therefore, if many x are solved (aka not few) we know that y must have occurred. The fact that this is a conditional statement allows us to run the contrapositive!”

1
PrepTests ·
PT117.S2.Q13
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Wednesday, Jul 24 2024

#help #feedback #urgent J.Y. talks about running the contrapositive here with a "few" statement, but we were told in earlier lessons that you cannot run a contrapositive of "some" or "most" statements. Please explain because now I am very confused.

0
PrepTests ·
PT125.S1.P2.Q8
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Friday, Jul 19 2024

#help question 8's beginning is cut off. J.Y says to return back to question 8, and two answer choices are already stricken, but there was no prior explanation.

1
PrepTests ·
PT153.S1.P4.Q23
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Monday, Jul 08 2024

#help #feedback Question 23's explanation is cut off. It starts off with C and D already eliminated with no explanation.

0
PrepTests ·
PT120.S1.Q20
User Avatar
kaylabjessup391
Saturday, Jun 29 2024

#help still don’t understand why A is wrong.

0
User Avatar
•

Monday, Jun 10 2024

kaylabjessup391

PT156.S2.Q15 - People would not follow a leader...

I previously chose B and got it wrong. I now see why A is the correct answer.

The question stated "People would not follow a leader if they felt there was nothing they could gain by following that leader. Therefore, even those leaders who are incompetent or evil bring some good to their followers."

In lawgic, this translates to "If they felt there was nothing they could gain by following that leader, people would not follow a leader. Therefore, even those leaders who are incompetent or evil bring some good to their followers."

Nothing to Gain (/GA) --> Not Follow a Leader (/FL). So /GA-->/FL. The contrapositive of this is FL-->GA. (If you follow a leader, then you have something to gain).

Following Incompetent or Evil Leader (FIEL) --> Bring Some Good (BG). So FIEL-->BSG

  • FL-->GA

  • FIEL-->BSG

    • A most closely matches this.

    (Expound upon theories) EUO-->BT (Believe are True)

    (Any theory expounded) ATE-->GOT (Grain of Truth)

    B talks about worst circumstances and then vicious people. But A sticks with the subject of theories being expounded upon, and the stimulus talks about following leaders.

    Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

    0
    Lessons · Transition to Sufficient Assumption Questions
    User Avatar
    kaylabjessup391
    Saturday, May 04 2024

    It would be helpful to have hyperlinks or a quick dictionary on the side for all these acronyms. I know they have been defined in previous lessons, but it's tough to keep up with all of them. #feedback

    83
    Lessons · Lesson 2 - Coral Reef Shrimp
    User Avatar
    kaylabjessup391
    Sunday, Mar 24 2024

    Agreed. Listening to the explanation before getting a chance to try it myself isn't as helpful.

    6
    Lessons · Drill - MSS Questions
    User Avatar
    kaylabjessup391
    Wednesday, Mar 06 2024

    #feedback viewing my results and clicking on the magnifier class to view the question on my mobile device is very difficult. The question and answers are blown up to over 400% their normal size, and I cannot zoom out. It makes it unreadable.

    I should also be able to view my past results and answers even after clicking out of the drill tab. There should be a section for history to review past correct and incorrect answers.

    2
    Lessons · You Try - Political Criticism
    User Avatar
    kaylabjessup391
    Thursday, Feb 22 2024

    You should be able to see the question and all answer choices at the very beginning of the video, and/or in the text below the video. #feedback

    2
    Lessons · Skill Builder - Negation 1
    User Avatar
    kaylabjessup391
    Wednesday, Feb 14 2024

    Please #help with Number 4 "Some alphabets are not phonetic." Why is "Some" translated to "All" here when in the lesson it said to translate "Some" to "None?"

    3
    Lessons · Group 1 - Sufficient Condition Indicators
    User Avatar
    kaylabjessup391
    Tuesday, Feb 06 2024

    I have the exact same question and would appreciate a breakdown.

    #help (Added by Admin)

    1

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?