I agree. But the comment below makes sense in that AC C is really just like a "duh, of course there would be other materials". Thus, making D the next best weakening AC. Still very bad AC's though.

A: The answer talks about blossoms belonging to the rhododendrons and not the leaves.

B: This answer is not relevant to the argument.

C: Not relevant either.

D: Because of the height difference, the R flowers may have an air temp surrounding them that is higher than the temp of the C flower, which allows for a degree differential of more than 2 celsius. Therefore, determining a thermometer's accuracy based on the appearance of these two flowers side by side can yield incorrect results regarding the actual temperature.

E: What is a moderate temperature range? Which range are these flowers in? What is a warm or cold range? This answer choice forces us to make so many assumptions that it doesn't do much other than add another piece of support that can be easily disproved. It does nothing that says the premises cannot support the conclusion as it says nothing about the curling of the leaves or the blossoming of the petals of both flowers.

Kim says that a change in attitudes in people in the 18th century in northern Europe that made them happier about life was caused by a dramatic increase in life expectancy.

Lee says nope, that an increase in life expectancy could not have caused this change in attitudes where people are happier since these people were unaware that their life expectancy increased.

Which one strengthens Kim's argument?

A: The increase in life expectancy leads to economic changes in a population, which then lead to a change in attitudes. Alright great, this one adds another layer of support to Kim's argument and the premise and conclusion remain intact.

B: This answer backs Lee's argument by saying hey look, expert psychologists are coming at us with facts. People's attitudes about their life can change when they know they might live longer. If these psychologists are saying this, then perhaps Lee's argument has some merit, which in turn, does not strengthen Kim's argument.

C: This answer isn't relevant other than the fact that it says that philosophers back then in that time period made many opinions that were based on incomplete information and this happened to not affect the ideas people had. But so what? This doesn't do much to add to Kim's argument.

D: This one says that the concept of life expectancy did not exist in this time period, so people of this time period had no idea what a life expectancy even was. They kind of just lived until they died and that was pretty much it. Therefore, they couldn't have possibly been aware that they would live for X amount of years, which kind of supports Lee's argument, if anything.

E: Finally, this answer talks about another century that we are not interested in, so this one is wrong as well.

Hi Gen, I am interested as well. Feel free to message me!

This was very helpful thank you!

Felt this..

From a comment above I found useful: "Yes – took me months to figure that out. Consider “LEAST” to mean “must be false.” The ACS in MSS “LEAST” will either be consistent, irrelevant, or false. Consistent and irrelevant are still “compatible” since they don’t hurt or contradict the stimulus. You’re only left with “false.” Best of luck!"

I also overlooked E at first during the timed part, but during the Blind Review decided that E was simply a hidden main point mixed with the context we read about.

A - Was really more of a supporting point

B- Desirability does not fit here and overall does not make sense based on how the passage reads

C - Not what the author is saying nor is supported by the premises

D - Could be true, but is not the MC of the passage

E - Based on the context (people are indignant when it's suggested they are not reliable authorities of their real wants), the answer paraphrases the MC that says that people are not reliable authorities of what they really want

7Sage keeping it real. Thanks!!!

Please count me in! I'm interested!