Well, I cozied up on the couch, made sure I was clear on the errors I made on the Games yesterday, and delved deep into Arguments again. I just can’t seem to pull myself away, for better or for worse . . . perhaps a day on Games and a day on Arguments will be a good strategy. In any event, I took two back to back. I was obviously what my psychology-major girlfriedn would call “primed” for the second section, which explains why I did 20% better over the first one. I just need to make sure that I can self-prime on June 8.
Many of my errors are “Duh” errors. I can quickly see what the question was asking as soon as I know what the answer is. Sometimes I look at the question stem and read “conclusion” instead of “argument,” and vice versa.
What bothers me, and gives me immense hope, is that there are two or three questions, clearly among the more difficult questions, that I am able to eliminate 3 answers, stare hard at the remaining two (which are, of course, equally appealing and within 3 words of each other) and then, somehow, intuit the correct choice. This means that I’m seeing through the Matrix, bit by bit. But often I cannot explain the logic behind it . . . it just feels like that is the answer the Testwriters would demand.
Of course, the test is (in the words of how they censored Samuel L. Jackson in Snakes on a Plane) a monkeyfighting marvel. This is a test written by human beings, where each question has one, and only one, clear and correct answer. They take great pains to ensure that there is no equivocation when it comes to which answer is the “credited response” and why. No grey. Black and white. Wrong and credited.
It just kills me that I still can’t see the why. But give me a few more days, at the very least.
