It strengthens the argument by precluding an alternative hypothesis (namely that the difference in prescriptions is due to the fact that it is harder to obtain a prescription in the physician country than in the 2 other countries). This strengthens (think about strengthening as making it more likely that our argument is true) our argument that the physician's country suffers from fewer ulcers per capita than the 2 other countries.

from Imgflip Meme Generator

from Imgflip Meme Generator

Hi! Think about PSA questions, they use the reasoning of rule application. This is P→ C.

Our conclusion is that it is justified.

We need an answer choice that tells us if P → C (justified).

Therefore, the justified (C) has to be in on the side of the necessary.

D tells us: Only if XYZ, then justified. "Only if"is a necessary conditional indicator. So we have: justified → XYZ. We need something pointing to justified. Having justified pointing somewhere does nothing.

If you negate D, you get: /XYZ → /justified. Again, we need something pointing to justified, not not justified.

Hope this helps!

The second premise says since those days, meaning since thousands of years ago, people undoubtedly tried innumerable times to domesticate each of the wild large mammal species that seemed worth domesticating. We are still in the past. The premise did not say since the past.

For example, it could mean 100 years ago. It would still be between since those days (thousands of years ago) and the present. Meaning we are still in the past. It could even be 1 year ago. It would still be between since those days (thousands of years ago) and the present.

Maybe it helps to think of the past and present in this question as "if not present, then past". Like if you are 30 years old currently, both when you were 10 years old and yesterday are part of the past.

In the question, we are reasoning by analogy and comparing the present and the past.

Hope this helps!

The chain is : decrease cost → more CLD → profits increase → congestion decreases

To answer your 1st question: if A → B → C , you can say A → C. Here, we have decrease cost → more CLD → profits increase. So decrease cost (A) → profits increase (C).

Knowing about the downtown traffic decreasing or not is irrelevant to our chain of A → C.

Downtown traffic decreasing or not is the sufficient condition for noting, we only have it in the necessary condition in our chain.

Hope it makes sense!

Last paragraph, first sentence, typo. If these were Weaken questions, we'd expect the correct answers to provide alternative hypotheses for or explanations of the phenomena