@Max Hi Max, I was a bit confused on answer choice E as well. Now it makes sense to me. So basically, the stimulus is saying that "all philosophy classes serve students well," although he did only have support/evidence that SOME of those classes served students well. Essentially, he is mixing up "all" and "some."

I hope that makes sense!

I initially thought the conclusion was that the assumption about humans being unselfish is false (choice C). This felt like the main point because it was a strong and attention-grabbing claim. However, after breaking down the argument, I realized that this statement is actually a premise, not the conclusion.

My mistake: I focused on the most striking statement instead of identifying what the argument was trying to prove.

Takeaway: The conclusion is not always the most surprising or bold claim. Often, especially when it appears early, the rest of the argument is there to support it. I need to ask: “What is the author trying to prove?” not “What sounds the strongest?”

@A2 Hi! Invite me to the groupchat as well. i'm interested

Interested

This lesson HELPED a ton!!!!

Do you come up with the How or ..?

I'm not understanding the "Not necessary" part.

Hi Caden.j.t.reed,

The statement about blue eyes is supported by the claim that "those with blue eyes can have relatives," leading to the conclusion that having blue eyes is largely determined by genetics. While the conclusion may align with real-world implications, that alignment doesn't invalidate the statement. As long as the conclusion is supported by evidence or reasoning, the premises do not need to explicitly state the conclusion for the argument to hold. I hope that clarifies things!

I thought the subject was leaders...

hardware is a modifier