@kaliyahwilliams I answered A on my first attempt as well. I think it's critical to remember that we must accept all facts in these RRE stimuli to be true. In this case, the stimulus leaves no doubt that AC usage has a causal relationship to the blackouts ('resulting in'). You had it right that AC is causing frequent power blackouts. It's all about the assumptions we make along the way that trip us up.

A is not correct because the stimulus does explicitly state that overloads are caused by AC use. A assumes that because there are other significant drains, that they are still the cause for the blackouts. They could certainly present a strain on the grid, but we know for certain that the cause is AC usage because we must accept the premises to be true.

B is correct because of the truth of the premises. The stimulus only explicitly mentions that if residents were asked to stop their own personal AC usage, the blackouts would still probably happen. The stimulus does not say that if all AC usage stopped, that the blackouts would happen. The stimulus purposefully leaves out other kinds of AC usage that could also be a factor in the blackouts. It doesn't tell us explicitly anything about business and factory AC usage, but it certainly leaves room for them in the wording of the proposed rollbacks being only in residential settings. Conflating residential with all AC usage is the naive assumption that @danjpeach96 is pointing out.

I get the frustration though. Every word matters in these stimuli, and especially for these RRE questions, the correct answer requires you to read between the lines and catch naive assumptions, such as conflating residential AC usage with all AC usage. Hopefully this helps! :)

@Ll1209! You captured it best in your last sentence. We're only looking at this answer in comparison to the other answer choices.

A) Unsupported - stimulus has no mention of borrowed themes across cultures. Could be classified as anti-supported, given that epochs were widely separated.

B) Unsupported - no mention in the stimulus of the actual storytellers' understanding of narrative, only the act of storytelling. This one is in the middle of the spectrum of support; could be true, could be false.

C) Most Strongly Supported - it would not be a correct answer on a must be true question due to the broad language "all of the world's cultures" in comparison to the stimulus "appears to be". For this question, the support isn't the strongest per se, but it is present. Certain human concerns and interests appear to be a universal aspect of both past and present cultures. Not a valid conclusion, but supported nonetheless for this answer.

D) Unsupported - no mention of the importance of storytelling within a given culture, only that it was present. This one is in the middle of the spectrum of support - could be true, could be false. Not supported though in the stimulus.

E) Unsupported - no mention in the stimulus of what is the "best way" to understand a culture, much less that it would be done through understanding the motivations of its' storytellers. Could be true, could be false.

I got this one wrong initially, I chose D in the original and B in blind review. Comparison against the other answer choices is really important. Hope this helps.

@MelHart failing a sufficient condition simply does not give enough information to draw any valid conclusions on the necessary condition.

Texas -> USA : Being in the USA is required, or in other words, necessary to be in Texas.

Let's assume that we are indeed located in the USA (affirming the necessary condition). Does that tell us anything that we can use to be certain about where we actually are in the USA? No, it does not.

Not being in the USA (/USA) cannot guarantee that we are in Texas. We could be in any other state: California, Maryland, etc. We cannot draw any valid conclusion about where we are in the USA. Any valid conclusion must be known for certain.

The opposite applies to negating a sufficient condition.

/Texas (negating a sufficient condition) cannot guarantee that we are, or are not, in the USA. We could be anywhere else that is not Texas (/Texas). We could be in Antarctica, Los Angeles, or in outer space. Anywhere that is not Texas. Negating a sufficient condition does not provide enough information to affirm a necessary condition, just as validating a necessary condition tells us nothing about the validity of the sufficient condition.

It's two sides of the same coin, hope this helps!