This might be obvious, but a "claim" is a statement (premise)? Correct? So if the conclusion claim supports the premise claim, then that means the conclusion is more likely to be true? Because the premise can only pitch the claim, and the conclusion can only support the claim.

Oof, I needed to read this. Thank you!

I think it finally clicked for me on how to break down the stimuli. Not surprisingly, but I really tried to focus on how the narrator breaks down the stimuli (identifying structure and grammar) in a way that kind of mimics him. Talked to myself about why each word or phrase matters and who supports who. Saw the "thus" and almost went for it because well, it was the trap. But I always try to question myself, "okay is that really the conclusion?" and just glance over the rest of the stimuli to confirm my guess. I reminded myself to check each phrases structure and identify its importance (p or another c, or if it was a p, and another p). Which allowed me to figure out why the "wise" part was the main conc, and then used referential phrasing to answer A. Note it was a bit time consuming to break it down like that but it helped.

Is anybody able to download this to a PDF? It gives the option to, but for some reason, it's giving an error pop-up