74 RC Passage Three
- « 74 RC Passage One
- 2799 of 3815
- 74 RC Passage Two »
Comments
Hi Dave,
For question 21, I was not sure between (B) and (C). I thought they both had good and bad aspects...
For (B), I thought the good thing about it is that it introduced a different discipline in the argumentation which is analogous to what happened in the passage. (Passage: use neurology findings to evaluate a law concept, answer choice (B): use psychology findings to evaluate an econmics model)
The bad aspect is that the conclusion part is not analogous (Passage: we should replace/reform the criminal-justice system, answer choice (B): the economic model will not make accurate predictions.
Similarly, for (C), I thought the good thing is that the conclusion is analogous -- we should rearrange something that was based on some misunderstanding, but there was no "other discipline" mentioned as a support to the evaluation of the "misunderstanding" part.
I would like to know your thoughts on my assessment of these two answer choices and what advice you would have. Thank you!
Hi,
The structural description you used in assessing (C) is awesome and likely to continue to have benefits!
The semantic-content assessment you discuss in (B) is probably what the test writers hoped you'd do to become confused.
Avoid content-based comparisons!
The core of the correctness in Parallel questions is the underlying logical structure, not in any semantic features (like the similarity between neurology and psychology, or like your allusion to an "other discipline" in regard to part of (C) (I'm not really certain what you meant by that, but I am certain that it's the first part of your analysis that is spot-on, useful, and replicable!)).