3/5 on the hardest difficulty ill take it

I also picked A another reason why I saw A was wrong was that it says it does not offer the statement as evidence for that conclusion. Im guessing we choose A because we viewed it as evidence to support the main conclusion.

C uses the "basis" what we thought was evidence and says it was the basis for the analogy that does support the main conclusion.

What helped me do it in about a 1 min 40 seconds was to just stop mapping out the questions on a piece of paper like I usually do and read the paragraph get a basic grasp of what its about and the logic sequence and then while reading the questions im mentally reminding myself that It needs to be something that is happening behind the scenes that has to be true for the conclusion to be true.

Exactly how I am feeling too, I felt like it was too much of a summary of the whole paragraph, and the question was asking which does the argument require.

The way im understanding it is that the answer will be the premise that you make up that will lead to the conclusion

How I broke down the Question:

Individual freedom -> Social Integrity

Individual freedom -> rule of law

in order to make this argument "correct" we have to find a link between social integrity and rule of law. So if we plug this in

Individual freedom -> Social Integrity

Social integrity -> rule of law

Individual freedom -> rule of law

the statement "Social integrity -> rule of law" makes the conclusion true and thats why the answer is B

Im a little confused I initially had A in mind as the correct answer but then double checked myself when reading the conclusion because I thought to myself if Officer Franklin and Penn are in the conversation to get the award shouldn't they have both already met the eligibility requirements and now the only thing that separates each candidate is the saving lives and exceeding expectations part that is required to save a life.

My question is how to do you read the conclusion and automatically assume he doesn't meet the initial eligibility requirements.

For sections 3.1 -3.3, I get the queue of knowing when I am about to have a part of the sentence that gives me a premise and then a conclusion because in 3.1 It uses "Since" to say the premise, and then there's a comma that leads to the conclusion, but in 3.2 and 3.3 it uses "as" and it throws me off because it just makes it look like it's not a queue unlike "for", and "because". My question is how can I get a queue or just pick it apart to see that it's this type of sentence structure when they don't use the typical since, because, and for?