The way I see this, D is much more flimsy as evidenced by its amount of adverbs. Whereas, B is much more definite in it's claims.

Further, D is so flimsy that it's hard to even have a cause and effect so clearly compared to the stimulus.

So, it makes sense why B's "argument is most similar"

This drill seems to be better understood at using passive vs. active voice in writing these sentences.

C: Psychotherapy should not be done when it might not be high quality

E: Psychotherapists should never help in a manner that makes it unlikely to be high quality

Which must be true?

Well: "satisfying the demand provide psychotherapy on radio or television talk shows are expected to do so in ways that entertain a broad audience is nearly always incompatible with providing high-quality psychological help. Therefore, they should never provide psychotherapy on talk shows"

Answer? E because it focus of the arg is on the psychotherapist, not on the nature of psychotherapy

I mean, come on - you really think lawyers would have you choose a passively spoken answer? XD

Conclusion. Premise. Intermediate Conclusion.

I got this right by thinking this was a cause = corr error

oh no

This is the perfect question to explain to others what it means to be studying for the LSAT. It has all of the big ideas you need to master.

Figured it out:

"Must be" is too strong for this claim coupled with "believes that". If it "must be true... that the guide believes it's the bullhead catfish". But if that were true, why doesn't the guide just say that? Probably because the guide had some other species in mind.

Does B matter for the argument? No, it doesn't matter if it adapted little or not to this pond.

I hope I'm tasty when I get cooked, at least

I'm never discovering the aliens

Jocko was given a single banana.

Good.