I think the Disney argument is the strongest because it follows one of the two premises with a concise conclusion (i.e. Walt must have had enough goats for Mickey Mouse). The tiger argument was stronger than the trash bin argument because there is a clear relationship of support between the premise and conclusion. The tiger argument lists a bunch of premises as observations and is weak in explaining why these premises strengthen the conclusion that is Mr. Fat Cat is the guilty party.

Does anyone else have an example that might be easier to understand? I'm still struggling with these concepts!

I will score 169+!!!!

one bajillion tries later and I finally got a 4/5!!! i think i'm intuitively recognizing patterns, but I still do not feel as confident in this section compared to the others. I think i'll move on and come back to double check, but for now...i'll take my freedom from necessary assumption ASAP