would anyone say that if we give AC (C) to be true, it would kind of strengthen the argument, therefore it is the correct answer since it does not weaken? I got this question wrong and I am trying to understand the reasoning between A and C right now.

If I take C to be true, finding the paintings of, lets say, a pig on the island, it supports the main conclusion of the argument "paintings are not a description of the diets of the painters" So, if I find a land creature painting it just means they are painting whatever they want like the painting of this pig and not what they are currently eating in their diet (like the OG hypothesis was implying). I was reviewing that AC through that process but I am unsure if that is correct, or if it brings about to the same reasoning we should be aware of.

#feedback

can somebody, in simple terms, help me understand the process they use to understand the assumptions? i have a hard time seeing the author's assumption right off the bat and how thats sufficient for the argument. i somewhat get how to set up the arguments, with the conclusion to premises but when it comes to the AC's i have no idea how to approach them.

for c, can someone please show me the contrapositives of the argument? i am a little confused. i see the word without so that means we make one claim sufficient and negate it, but then how do i do the contrapositives? and how does this help with the reasoning given in the written lesson. thank you for the help