Looking some the comments below I see the tutor states the table/sit is exclusive because you can't sit at both places at once. BUT the Eco101/PoliSci101 is inclusive since you could do both. IF that is true then why would the steak/cod statement not be inclusive? can I not eat both? seem we are expected to make assumptions to determine pathways.

seems like we have to make assumptions to differentiate between exclusive or inclusive ?

test before this humbled me, finally clicking for me....for now

the right answer makes sense after I get the question wrong...oof

@AsemanShahsavand This is where I am losing the logic train. The term "hired" is used for both types of candidates (exterior/interior). How am I supposed to discern the term hired is being used exclusively for exterior hires? Are there any indicators that I can logically make that assumption? Why couldn't Krall be an interior candidate?

this assumption is so far outside the aruments logic. this is just biased speculation for answer C

rip to my practice test

i'm cooked

glad to see i am not the only confused one in here

all right still too slow. any recs for speeding up?

didn't go over #2?

does it help to logically order the premise to make sense aka moving fluffers is a dog , or does that corrupt the argument logic?

Question two baited me. rough to dissect assumptions in my head