He says C is incorrect because it doesn't specifically tie to the argument's content, but technically A doesn't either right? So how does that make sense?

Anyone have a better explanation for why D is not correct?

Can someone explain the concept of a naive assumption

I feel as though B is also logically inferred. If violence is a form of aggression, then isn't it still accurate to say that "The self-expression required for survival is generally nonaggressive"

Getting confused on the fine line between making inferences. Is it ALWAYS bad to make an inference about what the speaker may think or feel about something, or is it sometimes reasonable?

Struggling to understand how this is really going to help on the LSAT as you have no time to go through this process of connecting different statements.