Tip: Translate each answer choice into Lawgic, then check whether it matches the stimulus translation or its contrapositive.

@DollyPstan Glad to hear it helped!

These can be weir for me at times. I have the same general format wherein the answer I give has the same overall format of the instructors. but I just wrote it a lil different. It had me questioning if I'm wrong. But I suppose not.

Example:

My answer for # 1: hunting is permitted -> deer population has not increased

/size of the deer population has not increased in the last eight years -> /hunting is permitted

Provided answer for #1: hunting is permitted → /(deer population increased in last eight years)

deer population increased in last eight years → /(hunting is permitted)

My answer for #3: VMJ -> formed on the basis of its consequences.

 /formed on the basis of its consequences -> /VMJ

Provided answer for #3: valid moral judgment about a particular action → formed on the basis of action's consequences

/(formed on the basis of action's consequences) → /(valid moral judgment about a particular action)

@Cynthializ I' say your answer is valid ("either or"). Whichever way you put it, as long as the meaning is the same, you are correct.

What purpose do the parentheses serve?

@Estefany Great minds think alike. XD

"This billionaire influencer/underwear tycoon did NOT pass the bar exam."

I'm going to say that I got question 2 right. I was correct in deducing that neither was the winner. The explanation just made things feel over complicated. A is not more likely to be bought in comparison to B. Vice versa for the opposite: B vs. A.

I got this one wrong, but I now understand why the answer is C.

1.) The statement ‘No headache pill stops pain more quickly than Danaxil’ suggests that Danaxil is at least as fast as any competitor.

2.) However, the reference to the leading competitor implies that it performs just as well as Danaxil.

3.) It cannot surpass Danaxil in terms of effectiveness, but it can be its equal, just not exceed.

4.) Answer C is supported because the phrase ‘at least’ allows for a tie, whereas answer D's key word 'will' makes a stronger, unsupported claim.

ANSWER: Therefore, C is the best option because Evelyn’s headache will be relieved no less rapidly than Jane’s.

Ironic how the review itself is a comparative. Lol.

The cats last recording. Moments before disaster.... Before the Dairy nation attacked.

I hustle. They sleep.

I got number three correct. However, just like "though they soon will," shouldn't "as a doctor, I see two reasons for this." be uncolored?

The premises should then be:

"First, giving them access will be time wasting because it will significantly reduce the amount of time that medical staff can spend on more important duties, by forcing them to retrieve and return files. Second, if my experience is anything to go by, no patients are going to ask for access to their records anyway."

The conclusion would still be:

"patients should not have a legal right to see their medical records."

Am I right, or am I wrong? Please explain in the case that I am wrong.

I got a 5/5, but I still feel that number 5's argument as rather weak. I.e., the support was weak. I noticed that others here feel similarly, so I ask that an instructor explain this to me. Either to inform me that I am wrong and explain why, or to validate my claim and explain why.

Big preesh if you can help.

So, the primary goal is to analyze the argument’s assumptions using only the info provided via the argument and avoid adding outside information or biases.