can someone explain to me how Chin argued against the premise in D? It feels equally as tangential as Waller arguing the premise in B. Chin didn't mention - implicitly or explicitly - how showing ESP was or wasn't proof of existence. #help

question four: why did we invert "mixed" and "increased"? I assumed that "whenever" was in Group 1, so the first if-then statement would be in the same order as the sentence. Is that not correct?

#help

Is there a reason you only write the original if-then symbols in the "separate" sections, but don't introduce the contrapositives until the "chained" section? I might be missing something, but I feel like the explanations for these require a lot of mental leaps, which could be fine if you are just reviewing but is confusing when you are learning. It would also be great if there was an explanation under each of these, like there were for the last few skill builders. #feedback. Thanks!

#feedback. It would be great if you could put a "rule" for 4.1 or, alternatively, indicate if there isn't a rule.

I would also love it if we could bold/italicize/underline/highlight in the answer boxes.

I actually think that this first group of indicators is the toughest to understand so it may make sense to start with others?

Thanks!

I also have this question! Wouldn't "bloom in winter" be the predicate? In there translation, they treat "bloom" as part of the subject, and "in winter" as the predicate.

#help (Added by Admin)

For 2.1: None of the flowers in the garden bloom in winter.

Wouldn't the if/then be:

If/Then: If it is a flower in the garden, then it does not bloom in winter. If it is blooming in winter, then it is not a flower in the garden.

Because "bloom in winter" is the predicate. But your answer (If the flowers in the garden are blooming, then it is not winter. If it is winter, then the flowers in the garden are not blooming.) treats "it is winter" as a predicate.

#help (Added by Admin)