One of your funnier videos. My question is how do we know replacement copies ARE available?

I feel like this isn't an argument. It just seems factual.

My first reaction to seeing the answers is where in the world did they get all of this from

I still don't get why A isn't right. Can someone explain this to me?

I assumed that traditional meant prehistoric. I thought A was wrong bc it was already explained.

How do I know it's a warranted assumption to assume that for C, people are not maintaining their brakes?

On the test, I thought the flaw was they only chose old people, so I picked E instead of that. One of the only times I got the question right for the wrong reasoning.

I love this new explanation! I am coming back to review foundations, and I saw this!

Once I understood what this stimulus meant I laughed out loud. Such a goofy question

A skill builder of this would be nice

I feel like D is directly weakening because the conclusion says it's imperative that the alternative code is adopted. How do you weaken that? By saying, it's not always reasonable. Thus, it's no longer imperative. Can someone explain to me why my explanation is wrong?

The analogy analysis was really helpful for me. Thank you JY!

I'm so mad about this question because there is definitely a similar question and scenario where the flaw is E, assuming the future will repeat the past

Smh. Got #7 wrong because I thought "underscore" meant undermine.

It would be super useful to see real time walkthrough solving of all types of LR questions #feedback

Isn't "explanations" wrong though? The argument simply refutes ONE alternative explanation

I feel like B was a complex and purposeful trap answer that one could fall to if they previously did a Weaken. If you read the stimulus and then go into the answers trying to refute the argument, B would be a good path for refuting the argument

This assumption was so necessary that I thought E was a trick

Q7: My issue with AC D is that if these previous writers work was not popular, then how can you make the argument that these previous authors were revolutionary instead of the 1980s women? The field knows about these new methods because of the 1980s women, even if the previous women were the first to do it.

Was anyone else like WTF when trying to translate?

I don't understand how a "will" statement can be a premise for a "may" conclusion in this circumstance. It seems like the conclusion of the argument is just weaker than premise.

I tried to diagram with logic. Did not help at all.

I don't understand why C is wrong. The answer does not have to be specific, right? And it must be true that at least one company refused, right?

"the last question is pretty easy" 😭

The person who created this question is a demon LOL. The even though clause came so out of left field