Can we get a feature that hides the question stem (similar to the line by line feature)? that way we can analyze the stimulus before even looking at the question type

that's a good way to look at it, most of the passage talks about Gluck's view over the critics, so this implies the author is siding with Gluck.

Can E be eliminated bc the stimulus says "some" and E says "anyone"?

For E does it have to address BOTH the very light teaching loads and very small class sizes? If an answer only mentions one of these 2 conditions, is it wrong?

#5: why can't it be W > not F ?

so is the 2nd exercise wrong bc you can't combine the chains since they both start with the same sufficinet conditions? and vice versa for the contrapositive, you cant link any of the conditions.

For the 1st exercise: Why is E not a correct answer bc according to the chain if you take the contrapositive, it reads as not Extraordinary discipline > not trained ? not a force user > not a Jedi.

for #6, how come the contrapositive was not taken?

For #5, I deduced Politicians become corrupt and society's elite corrupt as just C (for corruption) in both of my chains bc both concepts mean the same thing. Is that correct way to look at it?

For #1, does it matter if I did it like this:

develop heart disease → /(lazy cat)

lazy cat → /(develop heart disease)

Confused because don't want to mess it up due to the contrapositive.

Can't we just diagram it as J > F

L > J

Thus, L > F

(that way the J's cancel out, leading us to the conclsuion)

How is "that" an object?

I figured it wasn't B bc the stimulus says "almost all" and "unlikely" so it is not saying all corporations do this by using this phrasing. Is that another way of looking at it?

Question 4: Why isn't the subject noun hurricanes and the predicate-verb threaten.

Question 2: I thought "the concept" modified developed, rather than being an object

Similarly, for Q3: I thought "billboards are the basis of our business" modified declared.

for sentence 4, why isn't scientists the noun (I thought it was bc "who" is right after it), but it does say "who" is often, not always used as a noun modifier.