Assumption is that only this grass makes the caterpillar unpalatable.

I understand why B is the correct answer, as it completely destroys the support between the premise and conclusion. I'm still confused as to why A isn't correct, though. Could anyone explain? #help

The problem I had with B) is the use of "scant evidence that remains." I didn't really feel like that claim was supported by the stimulus so I went with (D), fully knowing that I also didn't like the statement that "research into the history of textiles spurred sweeping changes." I immediately questioned the truth of whether the research into textiles spurred sweeping changes since that's never stated.

When stuck between two answers for a MP question, pick the more general answer that is factually correct. Also realizing now that the claim about there being scant evidence is reasonable. At the very least, we know there is not an abundance of evidence.

Can someone explain to me how (E) is different from (D) #feedback #help Thank you!

I think the crux of the issue here is the use of "outcome." Engle's use of "outcome" implies that he thinks McKinley is saying that the side effects of the drug will tell us whether it is therapeutically effective or not, which is not what McKinley is saying. Engle is interpreting the "various effects on the body" to mean the therapeutic effects aka outcome rather than the side effects whereas McKinley is simply mentioning how side effects of the drug will make the blind study not possible.

I chose (C) as well but I'm realizing that whether the placebo has any side effects or not is irrelevant here. Not only does McKinley not say anything about the placebo having side effects or not, even if it did, the misinterpretation lies in the fact that Engle understands "side effects" to mean "therapeutic outcome" and that is not what McKinley is saying.

This was so tricky!

B TRAPPED ME SO HARD.

I have a question that just arose after watching the explanation for this problem. When we have a weakening/strengthening question with an EXCEPT, is the assumption that the correct answer STRENGTHENS the argument or just doesn't weaken it, which is why it is correct? I have been thinking that if it doesn't weaken it, it automatically strengthens it....which I'm learning is the wrong way to think through 7sage!! Does anyone have thoughts on this/ how to conceptualize weakening/strengthening questions with EXCEPT? #help

This is my exact situation!

Who wants to make a group chat? I don't use snapchat lol.

I'm interested! I'm taking April and planning on taking June!

Can someone explain to me the sufficient "kicking up" concept? I am confused as to how that works and how that reveals what is wrong with the argument #help #feedback

Thank you for this!

#help is answer choice (E) wrong for the same reason that (C) is wrong? In other words, it is a causal relationship. The stimulus tells us that if you purchase from telemarketers, they are more likely to target you for more calls.

Unlike the stimulus which tests our ability to pick up on a correlation/causation flaw, like AC (C), AC (E) is establishing a causal relationship and is therefore not flawed in the same way the stimus is. Is this an accurate understanding?

Wow, that was subtle. I needed this video to point out the fact that the psychologist's research is being used as a premise to attempt to prove this conclusion. I find these live classes to be helpful. Thank you!