"It has to be," he said so eloquently - as if such an answer were to be so obvious to the common folk.

Great question for Lawgic mapping practice. I got this question wrong initially, but corrected my error(s) the second time around thru mapping. Here was my thought process before finalizing (B) as my answer choice.

A: In a sense, he does contradict the conclusion, but he offers a reason to contradict the premise first. We are lost! → Stop for Directions!

B: He contradicts the premise. Therefore, he arrives at a different conclusion. Perfect!

C: He does not affirm the premise - He says "We are lost" instead of "We are not lost"

D: No generalization exists

E: Does not affirm the premise

I have taken the LSAT three times online and read the harder questions out loud. It has not been a problem.

This may be able to help:

https://www.velocitylsat.com/resources/logical-reasoning-question-types

Change your damn tires