The problem I see is that you can bypass the medicine completely. If you negate D you get - “all conditions treated effectively by medicines are also treatable by reduction in stress”. This means that HBP (which is one of these conditions) is also treatable by reduction in stress (TRs), so you CAN’T have /TRs -> /CS.

Essentially, if you negate D you end up with HBP -> TRs and that wrecks your conclusion.

Does that make sense? #help

Yeah, I suppose I'm putting too much weight on the whole suppression thing because it isn't explicitly stated, I just thought it was an implicit point. The most succinctly I can state my point - Somehow we got from unconscious thoughts to unconscious fears; maybe if we mistook expression for suppression, we could say that thinking something might be the same as fearing it. I admit this is a bit of a leap.

Right, I feel like the correct answer choice should have been phrased, "fails to show that the mythical creature only represents the horse in people's minds." since it's implicitly assumed that both the horse and the man are "represented in the mind" but the man part is suspiciously absent when it comes to fear.

Thanks for responding by the way, I do feel like I'm understanding this type of question more.

I'm saying that since the conclusion is that "this is a representation of the unconscious fears of horses", we cannot logically get to that from "we think half-horse half-humans are violent and savage" unless unconscious thoughts = unconscious fears. Perhaps I unconsciously think Mike Tyson is violent and savage but I don't have to unconsciously fear him because I'll probably never meet him.

So if expression=thought and suppression=fear, then the argument would err by confusing thoughts with fears and expression with suppression.

I understand that I have to assume that people know the corollary I just mentioned, but I could criticize (a) for the same thing. When I imagine a half-horse half-man, I have to assume that both the horse and the man are represented, because if they weren't I wouldn't know it's a half-horse half-man (whichever part isn't represented in my mind can't be labelled). I don't see how (a) exposes the flaw that the argument supposes it's exclusively the horse that's causing the fear.

I thought C made sense because the argument makes the leap from “unconscious thoughts” to “unconscious fears”. The difference between expression and suppression would be that thoughts of violence and savagery would be “expressions”, while fearing horses would mean that we only thought of horses as gentle and noble because we “suppressed” the negative traits of the animal.

Can anyone explain why this line of thinking is incorrect?

#help

For answer choice D, I get that "constant" is the key word here and that having a non-constant demand doesn't wreck our argument. However, one possibility of having a non-constant demand is having an increased demand as a response to the "periodic" trimming.

Then wouldn't the periodic trimming be ineffective since poachers would strike between trimming periods, so they they might even accept partially grown rhino horns, and the intervals between periods would have to get shorter and shorter but would never catch up to the poachers' demand?

#help

Attend law school -> redeem yourself?

If we negate that conditional statement we have:

/law school and redeemed

law school and /redeemed

Both of those statements above that we negated seem very plausible, so it would appear that attending law school isn't sufficient for redeeming yourself, and that you don't necessarily redeem yourself by attending law school.

Perhaps then there are many ways of redeeming yourself. If each pathway to redemption partially redeems you because it demonstrates one way you have changed yourself for the better, then complete redemption can only come from the continuous process of disciplining and harnessing the parts of yourself that you find lacking. Just keep fighting the good fight and living out the Dao, or the Way.

I wanted to have some fun with logic, feel free to poke holes in it.