Okay so I'm not sure how to properly quote people on here but they said us friday ppl should be good for tomorrow on the website. Hopefully we all get our desired scores and aren't too terribly plagued with vacation mode in our heads (I'm unfortunately already in vacation mode and have been trying to force work onto myself to be somewhat productive today).

Just commenting so I can find this post later but ya nice post!

I originally had A because I didn't realize what the last sentence was saying. If you think about it, it says "Gradually, time keeping functions became more important, and astronomical functions diminished (diminishing in IMPORTANCE not function)".

D is pretty much explicitly stated. You need to connect the dots between the comparison of them being (i) Complex to simple and (ii) Originally having astronomical functions with the interest in those functions diminishing.

Overcoming time anxiety is usually a product of being familiar to taking PT's. The main idea is that when you see the question stem, you know what to do and how to identify correct answer choices / incorrect answer choices. This process eventually building up to it becoming natural for you to do things like identifying conclusion, sub-conclusions, and premises, followed by a scan of answer choices while POE-ing. On the chance you can't figure it out right away, you also need to train yourself to skip questions and return to them once you've answered the ones you're actually good at (because questions are weighed equally you would want to get the lowest hanging fruit first, then come back to those that are higher up).

The questions you miss should dictate what the next move is. For example, I usually only miss one "level 3" question, and alot of 4's and 5's. So at this point in studying I'm more or less drilling harder questions with the odd level 3's to prep myself for when those slightly more demanding questions are encountered during my pt'ing.

It's different for everyone, the approach I've taken is starting with 55min PT's, and decreasing by 10 mins when I can score under -8 within the timeframe (my personal goal score is 160 so there's alot more room for error compared to someone who would want to score higher).

But ya, it's all about being really familiar with the test. I've been studying and working for 2 years, I thought I was "good" at the stuff but had bad luck for the longest time and while it can be true that some PT's are harder, you are scaled with people who write the same day as you, so push yourself to do the best you can / push yourself to being one of those 165 people.

Goodluck!

See you in the free market friend

Very happy I was able to Map this out and choose the right answer!

Yeah honestly I think speed comes with mastery / familiarity of the content. Like main conclusions (usually no matter what difficulty) just make sense to me at this point because of how fundamental it is to find conclusions. But yeah, you only get better through good practice and good testing habits (being able to switch from being able to predict an answer [when you can], to POE and "feeling" out the right answer when you can't.)

Hey, I'd be down (2 hours ahead of you). I'm scoring low 150's but definitely should be scoring high 150's low 160's once I nail LG's consistently!

email: studyemail4vince@mnrahall476.com

I'd be down to join! Will message!

I think it's because if it's not only occurring through chemical changes in the brain then the introduction of pharmacology (drugs that effect brain chemistry) couldn't be just as effective as talk therapy. Like what if it was a bit of chemical changes and being able to talk to a therapist? You then couldn't say that taking drugs is just as effective because you'd be missing the other half of the treatment that would make it just as effective.

This helped! Thanks Lexxx uwu

I understand why D is correct but I hate the wording of it all.

Essentially:If a "member" (either the color thingys or the appearance of the fish) of a "set" (I guess the set of effects it uses to it's disposal to fight off predation) doesn't have an effect (fighting off predators), the whole set doesn't have that attribute . Which is why D is correct.

The argument assumes, due to their experiment, that just because the color balls don't fight off predator, the whole set doesn't help fighting off predators. The problem with this is that there's a possibility they could work in conjunction to get the desired effect.

feelsbadman

I find with comparative reading that it's easier when you read the first passage, look at the questions and eliminate or jot answer down pertaining to that passage you read, and leaving the passage specific questions for after you read the second one.

Okay so for answer choice E:

I get why it's wrong regardless of how I negated the word "few" but when you negate "few" is it "none" or "all"?

(Assuming few is anything from 1-100, if we negate wouldn't it be none instead of "tons" as jy said?)

#help

Sad I got this wrong, but it makes sense. Essentially you can either

1.) Not think of fragility of life and be clouded by illusion

or

2.) Think about it and taint your emotional outlook on existance.

This stimulus gives no middle ground and is MSS, therefore, D makes sense because if you're not doing one, you must be doing the other.

I re-did this in BR and ended up with the same answer. Not that I had a strong reason to choose it. However, compared to the other answer choices it seemed like the best one, and through POE it really just weaved out and emphasized it was a better answer choice than the rest.

I'm mad bc during timed conditions I was trying to find a flaw between length of stay and recovery time without the consideration that the hospitals might just specialize in different things. fffffffffff

Not a master but I have worked up from missing an average of 13 questions per section to 5/6 questions per section (I miss them because I can't beat the timer just yet :neutral: )

What I can say is that 7sage in conjunction with Loophole will help alot and won't provide any conflicting ideas. I actually preferred Ellens method on going about doing LR compared to 7sage. But with that being said, there's not too much that you don't learn in the curriculum from 7sage when compared to the Loophole book (I think notable things are just strong/weak language indicators & the focus on reading stimuli in one go to save time).

But ya, nothing conflicting based on my experiences. Once again, not a master...Yet :blush:

Pretty sure this is whole to parts. If we consider connoisseurs as a subset to the general population then the flaw would make sense (people having a varied opinion and that not translating to the subset of connoisseurs).

By far my best section (-4/-3) and what I personally do is focus on questions that I got wrong or took the most time.

If I get it wrong, I'll watch the explanation for it, make sure my board and inferences were good, and follow the flow chart in the syllabus (do the question 5 times though because I have a pretty decent handle on LG).

Once you realize alot of LG (minus the misc games) is just a variant of a previous one, you will see patterns based on rules and if not you'll naturally pair up rules with each other and be able to draw key inferences. It's very rare that I have to brute force a question, but if I do I make sure I catch onto that quick since time is of the essence.

Hope this helps!

So I think C weakens because in the premise it states that there's a decrease in release of acidic pollutants over the last decade, thus there should be a decrease in negative environmental effect due to acid rain.

C is saying this decrease (of releasing acidic pollutants) is going to end soon, which weakens because the argument because the conclusion is based on the premise (idea).

Hope I helped!