This is an Explain a Result question. We are asked to resolve the apparent discrepancy in the statements. First we need to identify what the conflict is--what was expected and why that was violated. The two conflicting facts are: 1) Astronomers saw a comet get brighter in September and accurately pr...

This is an inference question, so we'll take everything in the argument as true and infer based on that information. We know: -ALL bridges built from 1950-1960 need rehab -Some of these have faulty design -None of the ones with faulty design are suspension bridges -Some of the bridges that need reha...

Nicely done! Really impressed, too, with how you used previous work to move through the questions efficiently. Excellent job.

This is a principle support question, so we want to choose a principle that helps fill the gap. The core is: Child A understands the difference between right and wrong. --> The push was wrong if Child A intended to injure Child B. What's the problem with this argument? We're told that Child A kno...

The core is: Almost all stereo headphones are bought by teenagers themselves. --> The safety feature in stereo headphones won’t significantly reduce hearing loss in teenagers. The argument assumes teenagers aren't going to buy headphones with the safety feature. But maybe teenagers have more fore...

We're asked to identify the point at issue. John says that attributing the tools dated 13K years ago and found in South America to this certain group of people is wrong, because no tools dating BEFORE 13K years ago have been found on the path they would have had to take to migrate there. Smith says ...

This is a tricky stimulus to decipher for many people--which may be in part because it's a bit counterintuitive. The conclusion of the argument is that electing officers is better than a direct vote. Why? Because a single person's vote is going to have MORE influence through the election method than...

Thanks for that explanation. Another way of thinking about this is as follows. We know we have 4 grade choices in this problem, since John has to pass: A, B, C, and D. We are told he does better in G than in I or R, and we already know I and R are different grades. That gives us 3 different grades f...

Writing in the margins is great if that's what works best for you. Find a notating practice that suits you--it sounds like you are. Your understanding of the passage seems solid. I added a little to beef up your outline below (in bold) based on my own. There's always a balance to strike between nota...

Looks good! I'd add a few things, see my edits in bold to your outline below. Passage Structure: Describes CAW Plan - Who's involved: workers, lawyers - Legal fees: in/out lawyers - popular w/ auto workers, spreading to other industries But Opp. Point: Lawyers are Concerned - Correlation btwn CAW an...

You're right that the argument in the stimulus is about the proposal and that it shouldn't be accepted--but I want to challenge you that the argument is pointing out the flaw of the proposal. Does it? It tells us that the students supporting the proposal will never be satisfied with it--but does it ...

We're asked to identify the flaw in Thomas's argument. The core of Thomas's argument is: Only members in good standing can vote --> Jeffrey was in good standing, so it was a violation to disallow his vote The problem is that the rule that ONLY people who qualify to do something can do that thing ...

(I think it can be reasonably assumed to be a few weeks or months) Why can this reasonably be assumed? A sixteen-year-old can say to his parents, "It's stupid to give me a curfew because soon I'm leaving home anyway!" He means two years. In that case, soon does mean years. "Soon"...

We are asked to explain why people would continue to make corn their staple crop even though it's less nutritious than other crops and so people started having nutrition-related health problems right after they made it their staple. Anticipating what might explain this, we can predict some answers--...

It's a nonconditional question, so we should be able to answer it by making inferences off our diagram (see attached). Start by checking out the letters that are the most constrained. For example, we see that L has to have 5 letters after it--P, N, O, K and M. That means it can only go in slots 1 an...

The trick here is that we don't have to have a copilot on every plane (if you look back at the constraints, you'll see we're only told there has to be a qualified pilot on every plane). So you're right that D will have to fly with B because D can't fly with A, but E could also fly with B and A could...

The core is: no evidence he was sane when he fired the shot, only evidence he was sane afterward --> Z must have been insane when he fired the shot The attorney is suggesting that failure to show a reason why something is true at a precise moment means the opposite must have been true at that mom...

Agree that it's a tricky problem because of the dang intermediate conclusion. But briefly, regarding your comment on (C): Answer choice (C) is almost correct. If the author of this question inserted the word "not" before "...allowing the police..." then this choice would have bee...

It looks like you overlooked the new condition in the question, which is that P is going to meet with S the hour before she meets with Y. So you have to have an SY block in your order. The constraint we are going to work with first is: S--WY/YW--T (This is a big chunk--S has to go sometime before th...

You're right that there is a term shift between human species and this prehistoric related species, which (B) and (C) try to play on. In another question with different answer choices, this could very well be where the argument is most vulnerable to criticism. But in this question, be careful about ...