Am I tripping because I'm not connecting the dots from inspired performances being present, being reliant on sophisticated listeners. The way I processed it was there could be inspired musical performances, but they would not be received as a "good show" if there were no sophisticated listeners to understand it. I understand the lawgic when it is drawn out and the indicators, however, I think I didn't take the chain as literal as you are supposed to. My unfortunate assumption led me to believe a good show required both IMP and SL, but not that IMPs being present required SL. Usually this would make sense but the chain should be taken as literal and I am having trouble with this. Jeez this incredibly long comment makes me think I'm over complicating things.

@cwferrari I agree. I feel that so far, we have been taught to take wording extremely literal and to not make unreasonable assumptions. This question is troubling for me. Of course my brain resorted to assuming which in this case worked to my benefit, however, I thought this is what we were trying to prevent our brains from defaulting to, based on the nature of the test.