The content of this passage broke my heart

I read all"mine" as "time" and it really killed me

It seems designed to screw you up when you feel it should be approached with quantifier marks.

I can hardly tell the difference between the 2 passages, man.

The hardest part here is the referential statement here: it has been said;

Authors write to give pleasure will lie.

it can not be true. because. if it is true:

Authors write to give pleasure will really lie- THEN we can tell the truthfulness of the book by looking at figures (it is false according to common sense).

It goes like:

Authors write to give pleasure will lie

if a book is popular, then it give people pleasure, so some are not true.

it failed to connect the argument it want to attack with the whole arugment it bulid later.

The way to connect is: if a book give people pleasure, then its author write in order to give pleasure.

as a nonnative english speaker i spent tons of time trying to understand what does the "function" here means. And i finally found out this was a concept in maths when i bombed the whole pt.

Doesn't A means the research itself is inaccurate statistically?

If you have a tutor and cooperated with him/her for such a long time, and you still get a below 150. Then, This is problematic. Considering such outcomes, the tutor definitely did not help. It seems that you are not going to get a satisfying score in June. From my perspective, you should consider take more test later. I am not sure what your goal is, but I deduced that you may want a score like above 160. That could get you in some good law school. This is not that hard, you can even skip some hard questions and still get that score. I am sorry to tell you that I think you are not going to promote a lot before June. But you still have some time before like tests in October. It seems that you are somewhat in a financial situation. I think you can go without your tutor and just practice with 7sage's core curriculum. You can do it.

how to do this faster man

i thought there are 3 kinds of paintings in the store. loan, permanent, and others.

i dont even understand the vocabulary here.

Ben, i thought you are in Japan?

This just a kind of mental torture.

I don't think we should not make the inference that "no last refuge"="death" it is a reasonable inference to make. And many MSS require you to make this logical leap.

The real problem here is like sampling. Between A and B. Both ACs have the correct conditional logic in the stimuli.

A is perfectly supported only by the last sentence of the stimuli. So there should be no doubt here.

The problem of B are the quantifiers. "Unless resource managers regularly intervene in most of the world’s remaining forests, many of the world’s most endangered species will not survive.” What did the stimuli say? "yet they include the last refuges for some of the world’s most endangered species." Do we know which forests have these animals? Or do we know how these animals are distributed? No. It is possible that as long as managers intervene in "some" of the forests, we can protect "many”, even all “most endangered species”!

This is a type of flaw appears all the time throughout the tests. And it is obvious that the stimuli tried to confuse you with a bunch of quantifiers.

i am in a similar situation and i can not find any way to fix it. If it is a comfort.

Even after watching JY's explanation i was still confused until i find out "elsewhere" means in the email

That is why I should not be a judge. I may send someone innocent to prison.

How did this reflect Kick It up?

How did this reflected Kick it UP?

Dont drink wine just because of this RC

This just does not make sense to me. In the analogy,

goal(gw)

goal(gw)→action(gym)

so

action(gym)

and we get the"implication" that action(gym)→goal(gw) or gym→gw

isn't it we what we called "invalid negation"? This is a typical way to get a wrong answer.

If you want to gain weight. You have to go the gym. Going to gym is necessary. But going to gym itself will not guarantee you gain weight. For example, you did nothing in that gym. So you still did not gain weight.

Same in the stimuli. The conclusion is "we must enable.." premise is "we must do,,"

apparently we missed "enabling is necessary to preventing loss of motivation". Only in this way can we reach the conclusion. It means enabling is necessary. But it still did not say it would guarantee anything.

Any idea?? #feedback #help

I thought it was BC so I chose E. 550 BC got higher food yield than 250BC? great!

If you really feel that way, then you really need a good rest.

This passage is informative.