Lessons · You Try - Thermophotovoltaic Generators

slimcharlie

14 hours ago

@MRod Honestly, NA questions are hard because we have been so used to doing sufficient questions that answers just feel odd.

Whenever I approach these questions, I keep in mind two things:

Is there absolutely any way I can simplify this, and still have it make sense? For answer choice B, the phrase "using current technology" stuck out - as is said, the conclusion is an if-then statement, so why is it ABSOLUTELY necessary? Would removing "current technology" change the answer's relationship to the stimulus? Current technology doesn't have a bearing on the if-then relationship within the argument's conclusion, and so it could be dropped. If you can simplify further, then the answer choice is too strong to be correct
Of course, negation. If it's not true, what happens?

I would recommend just drilling NA questions. They're absolute bitches of a question type that just take grinding to get through. Especially coming off SA questions, it take a lot of getting used to, with which I am struggling too.

General

•

14 hours ago

slimcharlie

What do question stats actually mean?

Hey everyone,

So I've been going through the core curriculum and have a few questions about the analytics after every page, specifically related to the curve.

What does it actually mean when it says "Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right?" What does that 50% chance actually refer to, and how can you relate it to yourself? Especially if you don't do blind review, you have up to 5 answers. How is this determined and how can you actually apply it to yourself and your understanding of a particular question type?

Cheers

Lessons · You Try - Shrinking Applicant Pool

slimcharlie

15 hours ago

@TeklaCo I might be a little late with this but I can explain why B isn't the case.

B is talking about the quality of education and its relationship to tuition. However, this is not necessary because the stimulus doesn't actually directly talk about the quality of the education itself, but what parents/students conclude about the quality of education. So basically, B could be false, but parents and students could still conclude that education is linked to fees.

For B to work, you need to make the assumption that parents/students make conclusions based off of facts, but the stimulus doesn't give you any justification for why they conclude as such or what would cause them to conclude otherwise.

Lessons · You Try - Rational Consumer Behavior

slimcharlie

Friday, Jul 10

@echeli we ball

Lessons · You Try - Unauthorized Access of Computer Files (PSAa)

slimcharlie

Wednesday, Jul 8

@asanchez Hello asanchez, the reason is because "ONLY IF" is a necessary condition indicator. I've been tripped up by this too.

Lessons · You Try - Unauthorized Access of Computer Files (PSAa)

slimcharlie

Wednesday, Jul 8

@Hashibiro Hello, I think what is meant by "reachable" and "unreachable" is the pure logical arguments provided by the stimulus. Here, we have two rules, with "J" in the sufficient condition for one, and necessary in the other. If we contra pose the first rule, we can get two rules that look like this:

~comp TOB --> ~J (logically equivilant to the rule in the video)
comp TOB and TGBEL --> J

(I'm using "~" for negation here)

Here, you can see that our REACHABLE conclusions are Justified and Not Justified. Furthermore, we only have THESE TWO WAYS of reaching either conclusion. If the answer question says "not justified," we MUST meet the sufficient conditions in the first rule to trigger it.

TLDR: Reachable/Unreachable refers to the conclusions which the arguments we have, when translated into Lawgic, support.

Lessons · You Try - Unauthorized Access of Computer Files (PSAa)

slimcharlie

Wednesday, Jul 8

@ArthurMorgan I also got stuck here and chained it similar to this. I think the "in addition" is fluff here - we are introducing a new relationship that is not connected to the old one. This might best be illustrated by asking whether there's any value in the argument TOB and RGBEL --> Comp. TOB. If the sufficient conditions here are met, our conclusion is a premise. I believe that this might even be an incorrect way of diagramming this question.

Basically, the second if-then statement is a standalone relationship when compared to the first statement. It provides another rule within the domain of no authorisation to reach the conclusion "justified." The "in addition" wording does not create a logical relationship with the first if-then statement, but is rather fluff.

Lessons · [OPTIONAL] Lesson 3 - An Art Museum's Collection (PSAr)

slimcharlie

Saturday, Jul 4

I understood the arguments of the speakers like this:

High size of contemporary art --> Museum fulfils its purpose.

I then looked at Simpson's argument, and found that he was DENYING that relationship - in other words, saying that the relationship doesn't hold (the size of contemporary art being met does not fulfil the purpose of the museum).

Is this an appropriate way to approach this question? I landed on A because it denies that relationship through the use of the world ONLY - this justifies the reasoning in Simpson's argument by denying the relationship between the size of the contemp. art collection and whether the museum is fulfilling its purpose.

Lessons · Lesson 1 - Medication M (S)

slimcharlie

Saturday, Jul 4

@Flying_Jatt.17 Here's how it clicked for me.

The instructor's diagramming is useful here. The domain is Medicines and Unpleasant (Generally). The argument divides that set into three: tablet, capsule, or soft gel form. The argument also provides statements that suggest that Medication M is not a tablet and is not in soft-gel form. From this set of facts, the argument concludes that it's likely medication M is in capsule form.

The reason B is correct is because it affirms that medication M actually BELONGS to that set. The rule outlines in the argument is a general rule about medications which taste unpleasant: by assuming that medication M is unpleasant, we can affirm that it does actually belong in that set. Take the opposite of B: let's say that Medication M does NOT have an unpleasant taste. In that case, the general rule (which applies only to unpleasant tasting medicines) would NOT apply here, and the conclusion that Medication M is likely to be produced in capsule form is seriously threatened.

PrepTests ·

PT113.S2.Q18

slimcharlie

Sunday, Jun 21

I'm not sure how the relationship between the first 3 sentences can be easily identified. Specifically, I interpreted "budgetary pressures to.." as action that is forced on the program's directors, not a choice. I do understand how the answer is correct, but I wanted to ask and see if there was an easier way to link language like "pressure" to a stronger "attempt to solve problem." I struggled a little here - it intuitively seems that "attempts to solve problem" is stronger language than "there is pressure on the program to.." Thank you!

Lessons · You Try - Warm Sea on Europa

slimcharlie

Monday, May 25

@yes-coconuts Yes, i think that the first sentence is a premise for the subconclusion (that there is a warm sea beneath the planet's surface). So, E would be accurate if the stem had asked about the first sentence.

Admissions profile

Discussions

What do question stats actually mean?

Confirm action