8. True

9. EF and MN are not parallel

10. Becky’s blood pressure is relatively low

7) Obviously Fido is not immortal. Just because Fido is not human it does not follow that he is immortal. Therefore this is not valid.

The thought is that if something is true (humans are not immortal) and something does not agree with the first part (Fido is not human) then the second part is also false (Fido is not immortal, therefore he IS immortal.) This is “dirty logic.” This is the #1 thing to watch out for.

To make it a little clearer:

All Oak Trees are Trees. (first part)

Pine Trees aren’t Oak Trees. (second part)

therefore Pine Trees aren’t Trees. (conjecture)

Obviously this makes no sense.

While Pine Trees aren’t Oak Trees, obviously it is false to say that Pine Trees aren’t Trees.

8) Think of it this way… the Given is saying that you are always studying at {{7:30 on weeknights and the radio is distracting}} you from studying. Now look at the conjecture. Is the conjecture true based on the first sentance? It says that at 7:30 on weeknights the radio distracts you. Is this what part of the first sentance says? See my {{ xxx }}? Yes, this is true, so it is Valid.

9) this is a little tricky because it again is a case of “could be” not IS! It says is 2 segments intersect they are not parellel and they COULD be perpendicular. Since EF and MN intersect, they are NOT parellel and COULD, not do not have to be, perpendicular. The “dirty logic” I talked about before would say they MUST be perpendicular, but that is dirty logic. Just because they CAN be doesn’t mean they ARE.

For instance, “Many girls like chocolate. Heather is a girl. Therefore, Heather likes chocolate.” That’s not true. Heather MAY like chocolate (in fact, I do!) but just because I’m a girl doesn’t mean I do.

10) Now look at this question. Read the second sentance. Now read the third. Is Becky relaxed? Now read the first. If Becky is relaxed how is her blood pressure? The answers you have just written down is what you should list as the conclusions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

Note the part that states:

the vast majority of the 256 possible forms of syllogism are invalid (the conclusion does not follow logically from the premises

This applies in 7 – in other words not enough parameters are provided to conclude about the immortality of dogs

In 8 – the fact that the radio is distracting applies at all times so whilst true at 7.30 on a weekday — it will also be true at all other times therefore does not imply that it is limited to being distracting at that time only

The other two are easier…

You merely need to conclude what you can from what info you are given –

in 9 you are told EF and MN intersect. According to the first premise because they intersect then EF and MN are not parallel. According to the second premise EF and MN might be perpendicular (but they might not be) so no conclusion can be specifically drawn.

(NOTE: In fact arguably as perpendicularity is only ONE possible relationship between intersecting lines whilst there are an almost infinite number of micro-variations of degrees of relationship around another 179 degrees of possibility of angular relationship then the odds are that perpendicularity has only a small chance of occurring…BUT this cannot be derived from the given info)

in 10 this is straighforward – you can simply conlude that Becky’s blood pressure is relatively low.

8. Only if the radio is on. If the radio is turned off it is not distracting.

9. Yes on this one

10. If Becky is part of the crew she might be working really hard and have an elevated heart rate. Becky might be afraid of the water, she’s in a state of panic and her heart is about to explode because of the fear she is feeling. Becky could love the water and is a passenger on a luxury sailing yacht, with a pina colada in one hand (Becky is over 21) and a jumbo shrimp dipped in cocktail sauce in the other, in which case Becky is defiantly chill-axing.