hmm i still dont get it - isnt the stimulus saysing doing something to get goal x will actually get you further from x because of a second unconsidered mecahism - ie paralllels c because goal of saving time is actaully undermined by time spent on delivery - this is differenet from D becaus eb is weight 2 different factors not different ways of getting to the same factor

i got this right because i tried to find an AC that extrpolated from past experiences to the current situation - D is the only one that made the 'becaus eit was unlikely in the past it is unlikely in the future' type arg - is this a good way to approach the question?

can someone explain why they thought C was wrong? - i felt this was quite obvious. I can see why B can be seen as right but i don't get what someone may see as WRONG with C

@ChillChill i had the same question! @TheLawgicTutor @TutorsGlobe any insights?

i chose C but i thought a potential problem with the answer that gave me some pause was that it is possible that the conclusion is about being safe to eat and C is only about solanine. we know if there is solanine it is unsafe (constrpaositive: being safe requires no solanine) but we are not told that if no solanine then it is safe to eat. so C only discusses the impact of solanine NOT being safe to eat in general. so it doesn't GARANTEE the conCluion. - is this line of reasoning correct?

me

me!!

I considered A because the passage discusses switching only 1 word but C is talking about switching to a different language altogether. Why would this not be a good reason to choose A? I understand that P3 says a word in a different language is used for emphasis but I still don't understand why that is more important than the fact that rehtorically determined code switching seems to be explained as using just one word in a different language.