Yep! Great job that's exactly it! The purchasing and transport costs can't outweigh the savings in energy cost resulting from the use of recycled glass
Sorry, just read how you asked about B not A:
It is the fundamental principle at play in rule #2. Trade, sale-- i.e. monetary value out of UCH is fundamentally incompatible with proper management of UCH-- why? because there is inherent non-monetary…
This is where the argument of different classes of artifacts came into play-- selling coins vs. cultural items. This is the only major distinction made in Passage A (taken from the words of the question) and it does play a role in the author's argum…
Sure! I liked this one too because it was one of those conditional logic questions.
The stimulus basically lays out this framework-- (I'm linking everything at once, but review the stimulus to see how it works)
Morally virtuous--> Moral Excelle…
This is a classic NA correct AC-- this is blocking alternative explanations that could perhaps ruin the argument. The conclusion is that using recycling glass will do two things-- one, lower costs and two, benefit the environment. What AC D is sayin…
Sure-- I loved this question because it reminded me exactly of a logic game mini puzzle:
There are two possibilities for a new course to get approved-- either by the Dean or the committee. There is more information about each group: the Dean got on…
I considered this a "false dichotomy" flaw-- even though the premises did assert this split, it doesn't make it logically ok. We can accept that it is what the author is saying, but we are saying this is logically fallacious- I think it's why the qu…
Yes-- it sounds like you are sorely lacking in a consistent approach. Make one, and use that to guide you through the section. I.e. LR -- my process for stimulus analysis is 1. Identify premise and conclusion 2. Identify Method of Reasoning 3. Make …
Sadly, the arrows don't work. You actually have to click questions (I tended to like clicking the number vs the arrow because it was generally closer for me). and yeah, the highlighting is a pain
PT84 S2 Q12 is an example of an NA that has a conditional as the right answer. I think that these answers usually happen when the NA has to link the premise to the conclusion. Sometimes (actually, quite often) the argument will have little/no suppor…
I just relooked over that question-- we can't assume from the stimulus that the insecticides sprayed onto crops were reduced even slightly-- we don't know that this has/will happened
Not necessarily-- if the stimulus activates the condition based on the premises it gives, then the conditional statement could definitely be an NA answer-- it just can't be the case that a conditional is given in an answer and we don't know whether …
No-- as backwards as this sounds, the question type is pretty much irrelevant (except to get the right answer, of course). What you need is a proper analysis of the reasoning for arguments and see how they work (i.e. conditional, correlation causati…
Yes-- it sounds like you don't have a consistent process. That is super important for consistency in LR. This section is really testing you on the reasoning aspect of arguments, so make sure that you understand the various different methods of reaso…
I don't know where the exact problem lies, but for me I just figured out today that my main issue is that I don't have enough momentum and focus on the first two passages. I just made up a tactic that forced me to focus and it's really working for m…
This was happening to me a few months ago as well-- I think the key thing that helped me was to solidify processes and have good time management strategies.