Welp it finally got too much for me. Way too much pro trump content in the replies, I can’t block everyone fast enough. And I can’t live with myself helping Musk financially in the slightest way. Deleting my password and signing out.
@alexpotato@seconds_0 That was a problem pre-tinder’s “match” requirement for messaging that everyone adopted immediately because it lets the app show you the attractive people no matter how ugly you are, they just won’t show your profile to the attractive people.
@fivethirtybait @SaratogaOSINT @agraybee e follows more logically than a from the first sentence. You’re supposed to ignore logic, assume the writer is unable to actually support an argument rather than just say related things, and answer based on what they spent the most time talking about.
@maddizzlee@andrewe@clhubes Passage also doesn't say that noncompetitive activities aren't already being taught, only that they aren't the focus. Neither A nor E inherently says anything about changing the current curriculum.
@DeepDishEnjoyer@earlofwallst Yes, I think this assumption is unlikely. It feels like if this world were the case that it would be very strange to write this series of statements rather than the stronger statement. A bit like writing "I have 2 dogs" & then arguing technically it's possible you have 3 dogs.
@DeepDishEnjoyer@earlofwallst In my opinion while possible this would fail the commonsense implausible standard of the full instructions which can't be fully seen in the photo:
"You should not make assumptions that are by commonsense standards implausible, superfluous, or incompatible with the passage"
@earlofwallst@DeepDishEnjoyer The fact that C is not logically supported by the text is also a problem for A. There is nothing in the text that supports a logical claim that A would cause uncompetitive people to exercise enough. If C had been explicitly claimed in the text then A would have at some support.
A) here is the equivalent of "teaching kids to read". Yes they're learning a skill that they could choose to make part of their lifestyle in the future. But if your goal is actually to "teach kids to pursue an active healthy lifestyle" then only E) actually does that.
Pretty clear the test writers want A here, but nonetheless the correct answer is E. A is supported by more words but the support is very weak. E is supported by few words but incredibly strongly.
I’m studying for the LSATs. Yes, I’m 40 years old and trying to start a new career. I’ve learned that my Chemistry brain needs to make a major transition to reading comprehension.
Is this question easy or difficult to you?
An example: "Elementary schools should teach kids to read". Ok, great, easy to understand. "Elementary schools should teach kids to pursue a lifestyle where they read a lot". Pretty clear that this is very different.
@wakeupitstha1st@SamuelWHG@ChrisExpTheNews E on the other hand is tautological. It is literally impossible to teach people to pursue healthy active lifestyles without having taught the dangers of a sedentary lifestyle.
@wakeupitstha1st@SamuelWHG@ChrisExpTheNews All the more reason to notice how poorly supported A) is. It requires guesses about whether noncompetitive activities in PE would result in kids exercising enough, guessing how it would affect competitive kids, & guessing ratios of competitive to uncompetitive kids.