Subscription pricing
Hey all,
Like many, I've doing a number of PTs and find that parallel flaw questions are my weakest point in LR.
I was wondering if anyone had advice about when to use mapping on parallel flaw questions vs. when to intuit the flaw and answer choice match?
For example, I've just completed PT 53, and JY uses a conditional map for Question 21 Section 1. I realized after watching JY's explanation that trying to reason through or intuit this flaw would have been rather futile.
However, on the same PT—Question 13 Section 3, JY reasons through the flaw in his explanation. His explanation was great (it was a part relating to whole flaw) but I'm not confident in my ability to know when to use reason and when to use maps.
If anyone who is proficient at Parallel Flaw questions could share language cues or other details they use to know when maps are optimal and when they should reason through the question, I would really, really appreciate them!
Thanks so much, *also my first 7Sage post.
This is definitely a question that preys on outside knowledge, baiting us to use our own understanding of antibiotics to answer the question. I picked E because I took for granted that the more an antibiotic is used, the more chance is given to bacteria to develop resistance to the antibiotic.
I thought E strengthened the arg by saying some bacteria had already become resistant to penicillin, and so overusing ampicillin would lead to an absence of any antibiotic that could fight those bacteria.
Definitely should have ditched that assumption.