I went about this differently. So, I understood the second to last sentence as

If Smith is right (SR) and one can discern Smith's social circumstances (DSC) then one can understand the true meaning of Smith's statements (UTM)

SR and DSC-> UTM

Then I took the contrapositive,

If one can not understand the true meaning of Smith's statements, then Smith is wrong, or one can not discern Smith's social circumstances.

/UTM -> /SR or /DSC

Then, this led me to B.

Watching the explanation, I realized I made it far more complex than it had to be, but I'm not even sure I went about it correctly.

#help (please and thank you <3)

If an answer choice like D were to appear and the text said most instead of some, ( lawyers‑m→ less prone, and if the answer choice presented as lawyers ←s→ less prone, would that be a proper inference or would the answer choice have to maintain the most (1/2 +) position strictly? I ask this just for clarification in the case that there would be other competing answer choices like E present