I don't know how you come up with these inferences so fast sometimes. I would not have thought that. Mainly because I feel I have more accidents near my house than on the highway, honestly.

"The answer is b"

*Pauses video to study the stimulus and makes the necessary progress to understand why b is correct

"The answer is not b!"

.....

@pamelajkok I think the profanity aids in the honestly and bluntness of the course, which is what I think we're paying for. Plus, this is an intense road we are all on. It's nice to see the author is loosened up. It relaxes me a bit as well.

Whoever authored this is hilarious.

I am hoping someone as 7sage responds to me because I have not had any respond to my comments, but I don't know why it is E. Ramon doesn't openly disagree with Sarah's reasoning about what qualifies as interpreting the news.

Ok I need a little more of an explanation from the last example.

I completely understand it but I wish you guys wouldn’t show the invalid argument in lawgic. When you’re still trying to grasp everything it’s easy to see and have it manipulate your thinking, even when you know it’s wrong.

How is an arrow negated to an “and” this was not covered before

So, necessary is the big bubble that catches all the conditions. So, by that logic, I feel like using "only if" turns the sufficient condition into a necessary condition. And both bubbles should be equivalent in size and trigger each other.

I was doing really good understanding it but then halfway through he said something and it just "uncliked" everything for me.