The key to understanding this questions is to realize after reading the stimulus that the author tries to make a valid argument and attempting to fail the necessary (a valid arg form) but fails to do so. Choice C mirrors this attempt perf.

B is wrong because if we negate it - "pigs are classified as pets" it doesn't wreck our argument even if we satisfy the condition that Amy lived in Springfield. What if in this town an animal can be classified as both a pet and livestock. You still have to satisfy the condition that your pet is not also classified as livestock. We also have to assume you can keep pets in Springfield but that's a bit of a stretch.

No. Remember your valid arguments forms for "some" indicators. You are appealing to a "some, some" chain that's not valid.

The only way "some legal voters are professors"is if there is a universal indicator for brilliant people. Let's say all brilliant people are legal voters and some brilliant people are professors = then some legal voters are professors (valid arg form #7)

JY just keeps reaffirming my trust in his curriculum/methodology.

Trying to learn SA and NA on my own made me believe I was simply not smart to understand the difference. Reading statements like the following would just drive me crazy

"A sufficient condition guarantees the truth of another condition but is not necessary for that other condition to happen. A necessary condition is required for something else to happen, but it does not guarantee that something else happens."

But he just has a way of explaining things in the most simple way. So glad 7sage was my 1st paid course!!!!

My main takeaway from this question is that I should not assume that everything in the stimulus needs to be taken into account in order to catch the missing premise.

CONTEXT should NOT be included in CONDITIONAL Relations. In this instance the marsupials part is irrelevant to the lawgic. This skill will save you so much time as you can cross out an AC as soon as you read the word "marsupial".

P -> Swim -> /Native

-----------

P = /Native

I feel like choice D asked us to assume that art dealers ended up attributing the works of minor artists to major artists.

It only states that they would forge signatures to "make them more valuable" not that they would be attributed to major artists. Even if that was the case we still have to assume that the work of a major artist would have made the painting more valuable in this scenario...

Not that any of the other choices looked better but I'm having a hard time digesting choice D.

I realized that the Lawyer SOME Cattle Rancher is not necessarily useless. I spent lilke 15 min of BR on this only to realize that the ONLY way the conclusion could have worked was if the last premise straight-up changed to a conditional statement.

I picked E but during BR I gave A the benefit of doubt.

If smaller manufacturers will consider the new product too expensive to manufacture does that mean they will go out of business if people ended up preferring the new detergent type? If so, would that leave the market to be in total control of the 3 major manufacturers and their new product?

Months ago I would definitely let my brain wander like this to take creative leaps rapidly. Now I see why A needs so much help to work and how it's such a wrong answer lol

I got the question right but was like why are BC&D all dedicated to the land/tree dwelling reptiles...

I did a retake of this problem set and kept getting this question wrong :( I see why A is the answer but it sounds too out of scope. I keep making excuses for how "it will not work" is too strong of a statement. Choosing a major premise (C) is my biggest weakness!

If the movie stars weren't Angelina Jolie And Brad Pitt then I don't want it

Only reason I didn't chose E is because it sounded like a trap lol so grateful for the detailed explanations

I was in between C and D because I misread that the nesting boxes have less space as in less space in between them rather than them being individually smaller. The latter is def not supported by the statement as we aren't given information as to how natural nests compare in size.

As for the rights answer, this choice says that nesting boxes would be "more effective" if they were better hidden. The "more effective" part threw me off. I could just hear JY saying "more effective? we don't know that!" lol

This question was so hard to picture.

1st it says the cave is full of seawater and only accessible thru an underwater tunnel. At the same time, I was thrown off by the picture of a stalagmite and i pictured it as an empty cave (never knew of stalagmites underwater).

Anyways, I now understand that stalagmites can be underwater so this means they formed when there was no water in the cave (otherwise stalagmites wouldn't have formed, it would have just been water) --> meaning the water level was lower than it is now ->meaning the water level in the cave is now higher which is why the cave is underwater -.-

I really have no takeaway from this tho. Get better at picturing?lol

This question was tough. I correctly identified the conclusion, premise, and context. I picked A because I couldn’t really pinpoint something that rembled the “such self-knowledge” line. I had to watch the explanation a couple of times. Here’s how I was able to understand it:

1. Looking at the indicators “most people” and “however”; it’s clear the conclusion is more connected to the context than other questions I’ve tackled.

2. Translating to simple terms; Most people think they know what they want. However that’s not the case (bc they convince themselves of it since they want to avoid the risky work).

3. The correct choice has elements from the context but applies the idea in the main conclusion

My takeaway is to not be so strict to separate context from the MC BUT also to not limit how I expect the MC to be stated.

From the grammar lesson, I understood that "But" "Although" and "However" indicate a turn away from context meaning that the actual argument is coming. So I understood that these words cannot be the actual argument/conclusion. So I guess it is possible for these words to be the actual main conclusion?#help