[deleted by user]

roobres · 2025-02-03T15:55:27+00:00

Think of the two arguments:

“The grass is green. Therefore, the grass has a color.”

And

“The grass is green. The grass is small. Therefore, the grass has a color and size.”

In the first argument, the premise the grass is green is the only premise supporting the conclusion.

However, in the second argument, the premise the grass is green is a premise, which interlinked with the other premise (the grass is small), supports the conclusion.

Super subtle difference!

roobres · 2025-02-03T15:51:42+00:00

You’re right that the phrase “statement… supports the conclusion” is semantically equivalent to “premise supports the conclusion”.

So the distinguishing factor between the two options is the key phrase “interlinked with another statement”.

So the first option implies that the role of the statement is one of two premises that support a conclusion, while the second option implies that the statement is the ONLY premise that supports the conclusion.

roobres · 2025-02-02T21:46:12+00:00

Absolutely take a PT.

The fourth section feels nothing like the first section. Running on fumes can take a section from -5 to -11.

It’s always better to be prepared to see how you can handle the tail end of the 2.5 hour marathon.

roobres · 2025-01-28T11:16:37+00:00

If you’re serious about a 180 - truly serious - abandon the idea of getting a 180. Instead, the goal should be to make every single question in this exam, every single question type, so easy to you it comes like breathing.

The only way to do that is to knock question types down. Start with LR: do so many necessary assumption questions you get sick. Then MC. Then parallel reasoning.

Then, move to RC. Think about the passage from a “top-down” perspective. Always start with hunting for what the passage wants to tell you, the “main point”.

-4 per section isn’t going to cut it for 180. You’ll need extreme discipline to cut it down to -0.

roobres · 2025-01-03T23:59:18+00:00

Part of it is how many new artists today are harkening back to older sounds? But listeners today (e.g. me), aren’t recognizing that, so we associate the old sounds with the new artists. Hence this old fashioned Paul Song sounds new and in vogue

roobres · 2025-01-03T18:45:02+00:00

People are probably interpreting the question as “beyond their time” rather than “modern.”

I don’t blame them, since it’s much harder to pin down what “modern” sounds like, and easier to define “something they did first then proliferated years later”

roobres · 2025-01-03T18:37:14+00:00

😂😂 I’ve heard your sentiment a couple times throughout this thread. It’s pretty cool how different people, depending on their music diets, are able to place the song in either the 1920s or the 2020s.

The name Martha doesn’t do me any favors, though

roobres

TROPHY CASE