... was the case with PT26.S1.G3. However other times if ... was the case with PT19.S1.G.4. What do you ... to split them, however for PT.26.S1.G3, I had just ...
Hey, guys. Why is there talk of three M here when the rules say exactly two M? JY mentions three M and others also mentioned in the comments section. What am I missing here? Three M was never an option for me becatse of that rule.
I did not choose A (the correct answer) in this question because I thought "specific examples" was incorrect given the fact that the passage did not raise any plural nouns and actually seemed quite general to describe their examples. ...
Why is "only very careful drivers use headlights when their use is not legally required" the answer here? I literally can't bend my mind to figure out why that changes anything after the headlight law went into effect and the resulting lack of collision ...
Is the reasoning flaw in the stimulus that it concludes what makes something not censorship from the sufficient condition for censorship?
If A or B, then Censorship exists.
From this, we cannot conclude that censorship does not exist.
I was watching the explanation for the in/out game referring to a group of people who can only be hired if they are interviewed for a position. In the explanation for the last question in the set, it mentions that the problem states at ...
Hi all - I'd really appreciate your help on understanding the argument in this question.
I get the gap in this question is that just because first doctrine states that "all historical events must be explained in economic factors" doesn't ...
Can someone help explain this question to me? It's the first LR question I haven't been able to understand, even after blind review and review. I chose answer choice B.
I was stuck between B and C, and ultimately ended up going with C. I immediately crossed out D because I didn't think it was relevant. Would really appreciate someone's insight.
I need help finding the main conclusion in this stimulus. I thought the first and last sentences were basically saying the exact same thing: that we ought to pay attention to the intrinsic properties of art. I read some explanations that involved ...