This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - PNym
Pages: 1 2  4 5 6 7 8 ... 73
« on: November 25, 2007, 02:35:39 AM »
new age philosopher: nature evolves organically and nonlinearly. furthermore, it can best be understood as a whole; its parts are so interconnected that none could exist without support from others. therefore, attaining the best possible understanding of nature requires an organic, holistic, nonlinear way of reasoning of science, which proceeds through experiments on deliberately isolated parts of nature.
the reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that...
B. overlookds the possibility that the overall structure of a phenomenon is not always identical to the overall structure of the reasoning that people do about that phenemenon
E. takes for granted that a phenomenon that can best be understood as having certain properties can best be understood only through reasoning that shares those properties
cr is e, but can anybody tell me why b is incorrect? i also don't see how e is correct because i don't see where the stimulus claims that it can best be understood ONLY through reasoning that shares those properties
thanks in advance
The bolded text indicates why E is correct and B is incorrect.
« on: November 25, 2007, 02:33:08 AM »
This game took me forever! So many conditionals! Can anyone offer any tips for it?
When I retried the game, I figured out that demarcating the sets of conditionals and contrapositives made following the chains a lot easier. Did anyone find the same?
« on: November 18, 2007, 09:40:09 PM »
I figured out the reason why TCR is correct. TCR provides a concrete example that would illustrate Dr. Rees's objection; the bears normally walk in a way that would leave footprints that look like they were left by a human who was cross-stepping.
« on: November 18, 2007, 10:44:45 AM »
Thanks for the information. I guess it's now been largely confirmed that if the LR section has multiple-question stimuli, it's almost certainly the experimental section.
« on: November 18, 2007, 02:29:14 AM »
UGH. -5 on Dec 06!
« on: November 17, 2007, 03:22:57 AM »
What was the last preptest to utilize LR stimuli with multiple problems? I remember seeing that configuration on the June '06 experimental section, but have heard conflicting assertions as to whether or not this configuration has appeared on non-experimental sections in the recent past.
« on: November 16, 2007, 10:22:42 PM »
How much can you reasonably expect to make during the summer?
« on: November 16, 2007, 03:03:05 PM »
Thanks to everyone for the discussion, as it was an informative one.
« on: November 16, 2007, 03:03:37 AM »
The argument can be said to also assume that economic retribution would entice X to stop selling their stuff for import. Such an answer would have also qualified as correct with the necessary assumption stem.
Would it? That assumption crossed my mind, but I also read the possibility that not selling X the equipment would reduce the supply of the highly-demanded agricultural imports. Even if X didn't stop selling their stuff for import, X not receiving the ordered equipment would presumably affect their ability to produce agricultural imports, if not entirely preventing that production, at least slowing it down somewhat.
(I'm probably reading too much into this...)
« on: November 16, 2007, 01:36:17 AM »
In the Centerville Botanical Gardens, all tulip trees are older than any maples. A majority, but not all, of the garden's sycamores are older than any of its maples. All the garden's maples are older than any of its dogwoods.
I correctly answered this problem, but wasn't sure whether or not the diagrams I sketched accurately represented the information provided, or even whether or not I should have diagrammed in the first place. Can someone clarify these two points of uncertainty?
I'm guessing this was an inference question (it almost sounds like Games rules). If I was going to diagram, I'd probably start by listing what I could lock down by age.
Then I might branch off "most sycamores" above maple and "some sycamores" below maple. You just have to keep open whether some/most sycamores are older than tulips and whether some sycamores are younger than dogwoods.
Sort of like:
Tulip > Maple > Dogwood
Sycamore >(most) Maple
Maple >(some, less than 50%) Sycamore
I tried diagramming the stimulus using conditionals, but in retrospect those diagrams didn't make much sense.
Pages: 1 2  4 5 6 7 8 ... 73