#feedback would be great if curriculum included more questions like this to practise

#help I still think that E requires us to make a lot of assumptions. It depends on what we identify as small/large families, our assumption of the number of children in day care. And I also do not like the vagueness of the word "later" - could be 1 second later. I am probably making it harder than it is :/

#help Q2 rule is really confusing me. While I understand the idea of exception, I do not see how there is a relationship between police being well-paid and not effective:

Well paid police -> / effective

How is it necessary for a well paid police to be not effective? The contrapositive also does not make any sense:

Effective -> /well paid police

Would really appreciate some help!

#help could I just translate to lawgic Hiccups -> Ebola. Then B does not weaken the argument as sufficient condition failed yield no information about necessary?

#help While I chose the correct answer D because it denied the assumption behind the conclusion, I had doubts about picking it as it did not affect the relationship between the premise and the conclusion. I thought that this relationship is the main target of these types of questions. Could someone help me and explain this please?

#help but doesn't E weaken the argument by pointing out the self-assignment problem? It looks similar to the previous question about ship passengers and anti-nausea drug

#help I intuitively think that the correct answer would be E - about the different causes of back pain. Even after reading and listening to the explanation, I am hesitant to reject this answer choice. Could anyone provide their understanding of why this choice is wrong?

Idk why, but RC is very uncomfortable to do comparing to LR

#feedback there is no option to speed up, open in full screen or add subtitles here

Stimulus says that there are more X than Y in a subset because X has certain characteristics separate to Y. However, if there is generally more X than Y in the superset, then subset arrangement of X and Y just reflects the superset proportion of X and Y

I feel like these are the types of answers that you do not need to analyse - if you just imagine quarrelling with someone and they say the argument you read in the stimulus, the immediate counterargument that comes to mind is the correct answer to the question. If I start analysing all other possible answers, I just get confused