I don't understand how A is better than D. Isn't the conclusion in the passage stating that the belief is incorrect? Doesn't D mirror this? A's conclusion isn't parallel since it states that the actual thing (unicorns) don't exist. Shouldn't it say ...
Hi, I recently upgraded to the Ultimate bundle and bought all the recommended PTs at Cambridge. All of this cost me a little over $1000. I've been working through the core curriculum and am now in the process of doing the problem sets. Is it worth it to ...
I can't grasp why B weakens this argument and C doesn't. The only scenario I can think of is if a symptom of a disease is required for that disease, but can't a disease have multiple symptoms that aren't always present? Just because not all victims of ...
I think I am making this one way harder than it needs to be, but I have been spinning my wheels for a half hour on this one. I don't understand how B weakens the argument? The conclusion only states that "it is clear why humans have some diseases in ...
receive a news alert for the millionth tree being planted in NY, and the first thing you think is, "but no... deforestation to plant more trees can release more carbon dioxide in the short term..."
... Necessary, then contropose. In short, 1, A or B must be ... />
In-Out Games (Lesson 1 of 20, 5m)
Or ... />
Not both is different because 1, A or B can be ...
I don't understand how A is the principle. Here is my breakdown:
The use of space satellites to study the environment is important. Problems can be identified well in advance, so people can act early. It makes sense that environmentalists ...
I don't understand how B is the answer. In the lessons regarding weakening, I was under the impression that we were to look for ways to weaken the connection between the Premises and the Conclusion. If the question states that "many human diseases are ...