User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Joined
Apr 2025
Subscription
Free
PrepTests ·
PT143.S1.Q17
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Wednesday, Aug 28 2024

I didn't pick D here because it seemed like there was a jump between saying journalists and news reports. I guess news reports are commonly conducted by journalists, but can't news reports be government findings/press releases, statistical data reported by economists, etc. In this context, then they full well could have an effect on people's beliefs about the economy.

I didn't like E either, but couldn't quite think of a concrete objection to it in timed conditions. But even JY's explanation isn't that convincing, cause sure the journalists only say they don't need to be concerned with the effects of their work, but this seems to work in tandem with the last premise that says citizens don't even consider journalistic work in matters that they don't have any direct experience in, which I think is reasonable to say that these matters don't affect their well-being. So even if we say it doesn't affect their work, it can be argued that it doesn't really affect citizens' well-beings so why would they have to be deeply concerned about their works' effects on citizens. (It even says deeply concerned, rather than just concerned, so I feel like that would soften the provable burden even more)

0
PrepTests ·
PT149.S2.P4.Q26
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Sunday, Aug 25 2024

I feel like so many people pick E over B on Q26 because the passage doesn't seem to be describing Gilman's role in the intellectual controversy. It seems like the controversy is just context to lay groundwork for the different sides of the debate, then they attribute Gilman to one side and flesh out her theory (and implicitly demonstrate how it matches the theory the passage attributes to her). However, I'm hardpressed to see how just presenting her theory demonstrates her "role" in the controversy, especially since after Gilman is introduced there's like no mention of the other theory. After hearing JY's explanation for E, it makes sense how its bad, but B doesn't seem very good either.

13
PrepTests ·
PT149.S1.Q22
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Saturday, Aug 24 2024

I kinda feel like JY's explanation misses the mark a bit here. The conclusion is about the subsequent instructions being effective. We know in order to be effective, it must be repeated many times. So in order for the subsequent instructions to be effective, they must be repeated many times. However, the stimulus says that it only appears to the subject as if the subsequent instructions have been repeated many times. If it only appears this way, then they were not actually repeated many times. This fails the necessary condition to be effective, yet the conclusion still concludes the subsequent instructions are effective. JY's focus on the initial instructions is misleading here, I don't think that's where the flaw lies; we don't really know that the initial command has or has not been repeated many times. I could be wrong, but this reasoning is how I deduced A. #feedback

4
PrepTests ·
PT149.S1.Q23
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Saturday, Aug 24 2024

JY kinda addresses this, but assuming he's also committing these acts implies that it's just a coincidence. A coincidence with more than one specific cruel act is highly unlikely. Although that may not be convincing, I guess try asking yourself if we shouldn't assume it's plagiarism, why should we assume he's actually committing these acts? Making (or not making) an assumption goes both ways. Also consider this is just a strengthening question. Every other answer is almost entirely irrelevant to the argument's reasoning. C is the only AC that offers some type of additional fact or premise that could make the conclusion more likely. However, the strength it adds is marginal, but all you're trying to do is add some strength, which C does just by offering the possibility the enemies just plagiarized.

0
PrepTests ·
PT157.S4.P3.Q22
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Thursday, Aug 22 2024

With 22 I assumed that the more you split species up, the more species you get with less and less members. So I assumed this is what would lead to the greater number of species that are endangered, since there are more species with less numbers. But I can see how this may be an unreasonable assumption

0
PrepTests ·
PT157.S3.Q10
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Thursday, Aug 22 2024

Idk if Lawhub changed with the new test format in the way it shows "except", but 7sage's new preptests all show except as italicized rather than bolded or in all caps. I understand if this is how its shown on Lawhub now, but if its not, why change it to italicized from bolded and all caps?? Got this question wrong cause of it since the question stem was one line with the except at the end... #feedback

0
PrepTests ·
PT157.S2.Q4
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Thursday, Aug 22 2024

I made a last second switch to D on this question unfortunately, but what made me switch isn't addressed in the explanation. Yes the conclusion does state that they want to make it only really difficult. But the reasoning behind this law is because they can't afford any reduction in the amount of capital invested into the country. We're meant to take the wording literally, so I took this as meaning that in order to sustain the economy, they require no reduction in capital. D points out that with this law, they may end up losing capital anyways, so it sustain the economy as it claims in the conclusion. I switched off from B because I assumed that there was an assumption being made that we should care about other countries not investing. What if all we need is to keep the money that is already present? #help

6
PrepTests ·
PT142.S1.Q23
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Monday, Aug 19 2024

That's not an assumption you have to make, and actually more so, its a wrong assumption I think. The carbon deposits are just within the Earth's crust, they are not a referant to it. The reference to earth's crust goes back to mentioning plants and animals, so live bacteria being in the earth's crust where the fossilized plants and animals are found makes it considerably less likely that the biomarkers are a cause of those fossils, which is technically what the argument is advocating. A way to look at it is just that the bacteria provide an alternative explanation for the biomarkers that makes biomarkers' ability to refute the coal deposit theory considerably weakened.

0

This mainly pertains to people who have used 7sage prior to the removal of logic games, but pls merge analytics. I don't even mean like the specific practice test scores, but like the questions taken, pt's done, etc. I feel should be easy enough to do. This is especially important when doing 3 section tests of older 1-94 pts. For example, I did a 3 section of pt 81 since it was one of the few 80s tests I haven't done prior to LG removal, but was reworked into being experimental sections on tests I've already done, but the analytics were added to the old analytics despite me doing the "current version". It's just a pain to have to use the obsolete drill function since I don't know what questions I've used in the new drill function as well as analytics technically being less accurate.

2
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Sunday, Aug 18 2024

Tbh the drop in score going from untimed and timed seems reasonable. I'd say 50% of the difficulty is the time constraint, so a 150 score with a "50% easier" test means that you're definitely missing some fundamentals that you should work on. Don't be afraid of practicing with the time constraint cause imo you're just building another obstacle for yourself; instead of working on timing while learning the content, you're learning the content, and then you're going to have to adapt what you've learned to time constraints which means you'll have to undo bad untimed habits that don't work under timed conditions (drawing things out, etc.) while also learning new good habits (skipping q's, etc.). This is why blind review is a thing; so you can practice with a time constraint, and without one, to really see where you're conceptual gaps are.

I'm not sure what you mean by "sr" but if you mean you're registered for the test in september, I would highly suggest thinking about rescheduling to at least october. Going into the test with only having 2 weeks of timed practice under your belt without really being a natural at the test, it will be very difficult to get a score you want. I think bare minimum is timed sections throughout your studying time and some PTs, but ideally you start with timed sections, then start "drilling" PTs. I don't mean to scare you but the time constraint isn't really negotiable with this test and being so close to your test, you're only hurting yourself by not testing/practicing with it.

1
PrepTests ·
PT140.S4.P2.Q13
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Thursday, Aug 15 2024

That last question should be illegal

10
PrepTests ·
PT140.S1.Q22
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Thursday, Aug 15 2024

But if you negate E, to something like "some pricing practices that do not result in unreasonable prices are not acceptable", this doesn't really wreck the argument. What if predatory pricing is one of the pricing practices that don't result in unreasonable prices and is acceptable? Isn't the conclusion fully consistent with the negated version of E? Unless I'm missing something abt the negations #help

3
PrepTests ·
PT144.S1.P4.Q20
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Monday, Aug 12 2024

The mention of Vulcan really messed me up in the second paragraph of B. Was Vulcan just entirely relevant to the ideas of positive or negative evidence? Or was Vulcan just positive evidence that was never found? I operated through the questions thinking the absence of Vulcan was negative evidence, so that tripped me up for some of the questions. #help

2
PrepTests ·
PT144.S1.P3.Q14
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Monday, Aug 12 2024

For the MP question, I ruled out B because it implies that wampum was originally used as a form of communication, but isn't this factually inaccurate? Didn't it originate as an item with religious significance, then evolve into a form of communication?? #help

3
PrepTests ·
PT144.S2.Q17
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Monday, Aug 12 2024

I don't think JY puts the correct emphasis on what's wrong about B. The answer choice says "the city", not "a city", which means that its not saying that in general, it's reasonable for any city to encourage establishment of manufacturing plants. What's really wrong about B, which JY does kinda touch on, is that it generalizes the type of manufacturing plants. We only know automobile plants would be reasonable. So how about a textile plant? We don't know. So B saying manufacture plants in general is unsupported. Figured I'd leave this here since I was hoping to confirm my reasoning using the explanation, but tbh I think the reason I posit^ is more accurate than JY's for B.

16
PrepTests ·
PT147.S2.P2.Q12
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Friday, Aug 09 2024

I knew what eschew meant but still didn't pick A on 12 because how do we know those were her contemporaries? Maybe the Art Nouveau was prevalent and flourishing in her time before she became an artist and when she became an artist, they weren't around as much. It doesn't really offer a timestamp as to when the Art Nouveau movement was around.

2
PrepTests ·
PT139.S3.P3.Q17
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Thursday, Aug 08 2024

Question 17 only relates to passage A, so it's solved fully in the passage video like every comparative passage video

1
PrepTests ·
PT139.S1.Q24
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Thursday, Aug 08 2024

The many is considered as many. Many does not mean most, it means some. If on a survey, 700 out of 2000 people say they hate apples, you can say many or some people hate apples. However, you can't say that, based on the results, most people hate apples cause clearly 700 is less than half of 2000. Thus, you diagram many statements using ←s→. Dk where exactly the logic lessons are in the core curriculum; however, my above example should at least help clear up the "many" confusion. :)

0
PrepTests ·
PT139.S4.Q11
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Wednesday, Aug 07 2024

I don't think this can be broken down into logic. Idk how good advice this is, but I'd say, assuming your logic capabilities are sufficient, if you can't break it down into logic, take that as at least partial evidence that its not a necessary/sufficiency error.

0
PrepTests ·
PT135.S1.Q20
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Monday, Aug 05 2024

Explanation for questions like this would greatly benefit from trying to map the wrong ACs onto the stimulus and seeing where specifically they go wrong (namely B and E). JY's explanation here hinges on you perceiving the flaw correctly before getting into the answer choices, and although that is the ideal strategy, it may not be feasible for everyone under timed conditions even if you are scoring high. Part of the issue with these questions is the abstraction so parsing out the answer choices that may be harder to map like E would make this a much better explanation. #feedback

7
PrepTests ·
PT135.S1.Q12
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Monday, Aug 05 2024

I chose C, but in blind review, I was unsure because how do we know that the babies returning to their reef are all one species. What if the species of shrimp was already diverse in each reef and so different species of shrimp return to the same reef and breed with one another, this wouldn't explain the genetic similarity then. Seems like a pretty big assumption to say the reefs are species specific, but still stuck with C cause nothing else seemed right. #help

0
PrepTests ·
PT135.S1.Q25
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Monday, Aug 05 2024

yup, its especially annoying when u consider there are questions out there that prey directly on people conflating opposites like this (ex. right/wrong, evil/good, etc.). But I guess saying not [comfortable] would be equivalent to uncomfortable.

0
PrepTests ·
PT152.S3.P4.Q26
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Sunday, Aug 04 2024

I'm a little late, but the reason why it can omit small is because in the same paragraph, it references the initial condition that is most likely (high entropy state) is cold and empty space. It doesn't say large, cold, and empty space. This indicates that what makes the difference between high and low entropy, at least in the case of this passage, is whether it is cold and empty versus hot and dense. There's nothing to parallel small to in high entropy, so whose to say that being small is a characteristic of low entropy. Maybe it can be high entropy through being a cold, empty, and small space.

0
PrepTests ·
PT151.S1.P3.Q19
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Saturday, Aug 03 2024

it's not a glitch; both the passage videos and question videos go over the questions for comparative passages... the passage videos tackle it from A's perspective while the questions videos tackle it from B's. If you don't see an answer in the questions video, chances are its in the passage video because it only deals with A's point of view or JY eliminates all the incorrect answers just based off A's pov

1
PrepTests ·
PT129.S4.P2.Q8
User Avatar
thayaparanarjun631
Monday, Jul 29 2024

Exact same thing w me. That's a good point abt POEing though, I haven't thought abt it like that.

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?