Can someone explain why answer choice D would not weaken this argument? Is it because it directly attacks the premise stated that businesses value their profits? Is saying they treat the "fines" as a business expense essentially saying they do not value ...
Can anyone explain why the answer here is A and not E?
I have major trouble understanding why A is right when it doesn't seem to explain why the 52% of people who like the candidate continue to like the candidate-- it _**only**_ ...
I've done this problem twice on two separate occasions, and predicted the wrong assumption both times. When I read the stimulus, I see a gap between the speed of the animal and the info. we're given in the premises, which is the energy afforded by surface ...
I picked C for both during the timed run and blind review.
I read from another post that C is wrong because it's mixing up the sufficiency and necessity condition but I'm still not seeing that this is the case.
This question proved to be incredibly challenging for me. Could someone please define how the argument used two different uses of the term "selfish?" Thanks in advance!
Like many others, I was stuck between A and C here. However, while I do understand JY's explanation that a "claim" does not need support while an "argument" does, I thought A was correct here because the second sentence of the stimulus ...
I don't understand how B is correct. It states that "a piece of narrow floorboard was NOT SIGNIFICANTLY LESS EXPENSIVE than a piece of wide floorboard'." However, how does that translate to narrow boards being more expensive--which I believe would make ...
I have trouble understanding answer choice B. What is it like to be ambiguous in an LR stimulus? When I was doing this question under timed, I thought ambiguous notion of knowledge was the author does not state whether her example of ...
So while I did understand why the wrong answer choices were wrong here, I had trouble understanding why E was right. Can anyone explain their reasoning here?
The reason I had trouble understanding why E was right was ...
Okay, so I'm currently running through SA's and PSA's and ran into this and actually gave it some time to sit with me (after looking it up on the actual explanation video, powerscore forums, manhattan prep forums) and I've come to rationalizing D as such:< ...
I’m taking PT, don’t score some of them, leaving for blind review. As of now, I have for br PT 54 (RC), 55, 56(LR), 54(LR), 61(LR), and going up. Please let me know if you are interested br one of these PT any time soon
sch.
c=.. fail to consider the human costs that consumers pay in nationalized insurance
p- high tech medicine is restricted
p2- transplants are rationed
p3- people are denied treatments they want and need
-
laf.
I interpreted "D" as saying that new fields had been found since "oil that is considered unextractable is now considered extractible." For "D" to be correct, I thought we had to make the assumption that the shift between unextractable to extractible was ...
This section alone has four weaken questions!!! I don't think i've ever had a section with so many flaw and weaken questions together... anyway, since JY's explanation videos are not available yet, I want to put these confusing ones out here for discussion ...
If you have done this passage and got Q14 right, would you mind explaining your thought process? The passage says "the second rationale is that a punishment is justified by severity of a crime." This leads me to interpret that the consequence (severity) of ...
Hi! I don't really understand why B is wrong even after reading numerous explanations. If areas subject to **more fires** (which is true when the level of rainfall drops below normal for an extended period of time like in a drought) tend to be **less ...