@cwferrari my exact same thought process

I definitely took the word property entirely too literal and was confused when none of the answers seemed right. I saw my mistake on BR lol.

@ggasca21 that's exact reason i selected c, thought d was too specific

I moved on from D because I thought that the specific examples they gave (being cheese and baked goods) were too big of assumptions and C was more general. I know there isn't enough info to deny these claims but there isn't enough to support them either?

I worked my lawgic out to be used in business operations + grounds for belief info is evidence --> access info w/o authorization is justified.

I got the answer correct but would like to know how do you know when to separate two logically statements?

@rjon27 update: i found the answer from a tutor on the discussion board for the question itself. Basically, still take the contrapositive but make sure to note if an answer choice is confirming the sufficient conditions (left side of the arrow) or the necessary conditions (right side of the arrow). B says that the necessary conditions are met but that doesn't mean the joke can be played. Hope this helps!

Tutor Answer:

Contrapositives are ALWAYS valid to use in answering any type of question. For this question, you started with a correct diagram of the stimulus:

Shows contempt OR believes it will bring significant harm -> /ok to play practical joke

The contrapositive of this is:

ok to play practical joke -> /show contempt AND /believe it will bring significant harm

Answer choice B shows the necessary conditions are satisfied. But if the necessary conditions for X are satisfied, that DOES NOT mean we can infer X. This is what 7Sage calls the "oldest trick in the book"—confusing necessary and sufficient conditions. You can read more about this common mistake here in our Argument Flaw Cheat Sheet: https://7sage.com/lessons/logical-reasoning/flaw-or-descriptive-weakening-questions/argument-flaw-cheat-sheet

woah this one was kind of hard. but once i went back and realized it said "to that person" and not "to anyone/someone" all the other answer choices fell apart.

Although I got it right, I'm curious when do we know a conclusion is unreachable? If it because this is an "or" statement? Why doesn't the contrapositive work in this circumstance?

the bridge description really helps POE go a bit faster. Thanks for the tip J.Y.

I focused on the fact that he committed scientific fraud but they could not prove academic fraud. Therefore, if they still revoked his PhD, we cannot say anything about academic fraud being the reason. Obtaining his PhD doesn't have anything to do with the scientific fraud he committed.

#feedback, can we get a drill where we practice just identifying question types?

I wonder if I would've gotten this right if I knew what attrition meant lol

Soooo...what about us that haven't noticed any patterns yet? I don't really recognize the patterns off the bat but I'm getting more questions right either the first try or with blind review.

@DebraGinsberg same here haha. i think we have to not be so quick to eliminate something "because the author didn't mention it"

@pamelajkok exact same thing happened to me. i'm taking it as a gentle reminder to make sure i'm reading to thoroughly understand the stim and not just to rush to the answers.

@Kelechi Chukwuemeka I got this right but I still found your explanation helpful! Plus, I usually like to "explain" the reasoning to others to enhance my own knowledge. Teaching is the best way to learn!

I think this lesson would be helpful if each question came with an example of how to make the claim causal or non-casual. I think seeing what would make it meet the standards would help understand why it doesn't.

@AlinorSmith I feel like B is actually a weakening answer because if funding is always subject to change then there would be no reason to believe the funding cut was a result of corporate actions.

On the other hand, even if you took research projects to mean something different than initiative, it still provides support because if there are projects that lose funding that also happen to be discouraged by corporations then a new initiative could potentially experience the same thing. It also is the only answer that gives reason to the assumption as a whole. Everything else that's similar comes close but doesn't finish.

Hope this helps!

Hi all! I have a question. Is it okay to look at the reason why the question was marked for blind review? I keep going back and forth on this because it feels like its not very blind if I know I marked the wrong answer.

okay so im not the only one that felt a little lost by the explanation haha. the written ones are great but the video made me feel more confused.

@hsuyt25 its asking you to weaken support for the argument rather than attacking the premises. So the argument is that Avatar is the most touching movie and the support is because it contains a sad, romantic scene.

To weaken this argument, you might say "well that's not true. The movie Frozen was more touching because it showed the power of love and sisterhood which is shown to make people feel special. People aren't touched by sadness, they're impacted by happiness." You see how I'm weakening support without saying "no your premises are wrong".

Hope this helps (if you still needed it haha)

@CheyenneBandy since you're still in the foundations, i think its best to just focus on understanding. then once you move to exclusively drilling then you can work on speed. this is why its important to give yourself enough study time, so you can do both without rushing the process.

@Hayes2ss this is exactly what i did and it caused me to get tripped up and AC E looked very good because of it.

@CMas i think its safer to take "almost all" to mean most. I like to think of these modifiers in four buckets none, some, most, all.

all implies most

most implies some but does not imply all

some implies at least a few but not most

all -> most -> some

these do not work when you flip the arrow the other way. almost all can still mean most because most implies anywhere from 51% to 99.9% in which case 85% to 99% is still considered most.

@ReeseWalter same! this tripped me up a bit. i think because before this question type we drill so hard to look for which one works we almost forget this one asked for the opposite

So it was wrong to assume that "or at least slowing..." was a new condition outside of sterilizing and sealing. Man, parsing the grammar is so important