Can someone please help me understand how "will not" is the same is "unlikely"?

I was between A and E on the blind review and selected A because I thought "only if" didn't follow the same argument structure as the stimulus. I understood that E wasn't right, because E didn't provide x reasons for that wouldn't be more important than the top priority of ensuring innocent clients are found not guilty.

Stimuls: If few students come to school --> none of these does any good (teachers, text, and facilities)

A: Honesty and good knowledge of the product line are useful to a salesperson --> customer feels at ease

I see that if I were to do the contrapositive, I could arrive at a similar argument structure to the stimulus.

Is there a way to determine when best to use formal logic? I think I may have been too in my head for this question and confused myself a bit. #help, #feedback

I selected E. Could a tutor explain why C. is the correct answer choice? #feedback

I answered this wrong and I was about 1:22 over time. Ugh, I get that with practice my timing and fluency will improve, but this is somewhat discouraging. I got it right during blind review after mapping it out with lawgic. Idk I wish there was quicker way to recognize the conditional logic indicators/have a more intuitive grasp of formal logic

This is deeply frustrating. There should have been an earlier explanation to distinguish cases in which "only" is used in the sufficient condition versus the necessary condition. This course cost far too much to lack in clarity in the word "only". Since "only" will be a frequent word on the test, it would be helpful to have a video on its use cases for students to distinguish when it's being used as a sufficient indicator vs. a necessary indicator.

Does anyone else struggle with when to use the third factor analysis of a question? That the question suggests that "A" causes "B", when in reality it's "C"? I understand after watching the video that motivation was the key aspect of the passage and not productivity. However, I know this was only a 1 star question. So expect that for harder questions, it will be even harder to determine when to decide if an argument's reasoning is off because it does not consider something. If someone who's struggled with this can comment below to help me out that would be great.

I'm restarting 7 sage for the 3rd time after trying a private tutoring course. So I'm hoping this go around using a training schedule that is accomodating of my work-schedule, that I can improve my LR & RC abilities

When asking about the organization of the last paragraph, it's presumably a given to view the organization in context with the rest of the passage. I interpreted the question incorrectly and was solely focused on the organization of the last paragraph in isolation from the rest of the passage. I selected D as opposed to A because I thought that the last paragraph was introducing new information and therefore was introducing a new theory. I did not select A because D emphasized the introduction of new information when did not. May someone can explain in greater detail what makes D wrong? Is a hypothesis fundamentally different from a theory?

I thought that A was all encompassing of what the passage was about. When the passage asks what it is primarily concerned with assessing, is this asking about the conclusion or what the passage is about? I'm doing my best not to be too attached with my answer choices, but I spent a good amount time on the blind review (hours) and still selected the wrong answer choice. For whoever reads this, can they explain why A is not good answer choice and more over what the question is asking? Is it asking what the passage is about or what the author's concerns are regarding the information provided in the passage?

Note to self: Subsidiary and Subsequent are not synonyms.