This is a good point.

I feel like the only thing that has let me settle this question is someone's comment above: we don't know if there's a great variety in Paraguay, we only know that there's more varieties than anywhere else. E is better because it follows in line with that correlational logic in the stimulus (used more widely, more varieties than anywhere else). If "typically, the longer a bev has been used in a particular place, the more widely that bev is used there" is true, we have good reason to think it originated in Paraguay because we know it is used more widely there --> correlational logic tells us it would have been used longer than any other place.

I'm replying to you because we had the same grievance with the above answer! I think this way of thinking avoids the issue with "typically".

@Asdf5316 Looking at answer A: Aristotle's principle of justice is widely applicable. What would Otis say about this? Otis would say yes: Aristotle's principle is widely applicable. That is, it can be applied widely to relevantly similar cases. And since appointments for friends and others are relevantly similar cases, the principle should be applied, and this is a case of injustice. What would Tyra say? Yes, Aristotle's principle is widely applicable. That is, it can be applied widely to relevantly similar cases. But since friends are special, friends and others are not relevantly similar cases, so this is not a case of injustice. Notice that Tyra and Otis are AGREEING (both are saying yes) that Aristotle's principle of justice is widely applicable. But the principle is that relevantly similar cases should be treated similarly. They are disagreeing that these are relevantly similar cases. By thinking through this process for A, we can arrive at B being the right answer.

The use of the word "sometimes" in answer choice D for question #2 made me second guess picking it as my answer. Is that because I am thinking in the sufficient assumption mindset?

In other words, if this were a sufficient assumption question would the answer have to say "If reptiles were capable of complex reasoning, they must be able to make major changes in their behavior". But because it's only necessary, just "sometimes" is enough?