@thaliawang825 yee

In physics "mechanism" means the specific real world process taking place that leads to a phenomenon, scientific theory is a hypothesis/explanation of a mechanism, not a mechanism itself. So yeah, background information (Physics enjoyer) did help a bit here.

Sorry if this has already been said, but in this question, we are basically asked to find the logical CONCLUSION to the statements. The inferred conclusion is basically that the "if then" statement does not hold because babies understand some words without knowing their dictionary definitions. We also need to show that babies do understand some words to better reach this implied conclusion.

A is something that could be true but contributes nothing to this argument so it's obviously not right. B is not right because "any number of people" is out of scope. C is reversed logic of what we are looking for. D is the most difficult to rule out but is wrong because understanding any other word is not really discussed. E is correct because it adds the missing info that babies understand words and has the implied conclusion that the "if then" statement is not true.

Maybe I am dumb, but to me this is a level 5 question.

This passage had me questioning my choice to attend law school

My fault for not reading carefully.

Would have been easy money if I knew what equivocates meant.

I feel like the explanation here is overly complicated. I just said x can't be Y, because there's Y without X. Which lines up only with A.