Good students learn more than what their parents and teachers compel them to learn.
Statements
good students (universal - left side)
learn more than Good student → what parents/teachers compel them to learn
requires (necessary - right side)
learn more than students derive pleasure what parents & → from satisfaction teachers compel of their curiosity
cannot / unless (required / if-not)
deriving pleasure capable of concentrating from satisfaction → so deeply you lose track of curiosity of identity
Evaluate
Because Must Be False questions love to test conditional logic (the correct answer usually contradicts a conditional relationship we're given), we want to read these with a listening ear for conditional logic trigger words.
All three sentences here were conditional, the first sentence being a universal about good students and the second and third sentences giving us requirements (the Required thing goes on the Right side).
When we have multiple conditionals, we want think about whether they chain together, which requires that they have some overlapping ingredients. The first and the second sentences are connected by the pronoun "this", and the second and third are connected by the pronoun "such pleasure".
We can chain all four of these ideas together to get this chain:
Good learns derives concentrating student → more than → pleasure → so much compelled from curiosity lose self
Goal
When we have conditionals on Must Be False, the correct answer just usually contradicts them.
Remember that contradicting a conditional is not the same as making an illegal move.
Given: A → B, If we see an answer doing B → A or doing ~A → ~B, we're not picking those.
Those are illegal inferences but they're not contradictions. A contradiction provides the trigger but denies the outcome. So we'd be looking for an answer that says "something is A but not B."
Given a chain: A → B → C, we'd probably see something contradicting the chain, like "Something is A but not C".