I simply read the stimulus too fast on this one and ended up choosing B. They do not say anything about how the author intended the work to be read, they just say there is no evidence that it was allegorical. D is very clearly the right answer.

I chose D after being stuck between D and B. I ended up going with D because it was much more specific language (ie. harm) than B which just references "other interests". I think also the question stem telling us to support the "reasoning" rather than the conclusion tripped me up. Now looking at this and clearly understanding that the argument is talking about the restriction being consistent with freedom of speech, B is absolutely the best AC.

I chose A. This answer was wrong because (1) you have to assume that "sometimes" is frequent enough to affect the results of the groups of people, and (2) you have to assume that "affect" means that the people are producing less cortisol. The correct answer is B. This AC is correct because it gives an alternative hypothesis that would explain the difference in cortisol levels effectively.

Lol this question sucks. I chose B thinking that it meant that some other artist could have drawn the self-portrait painter in the painting of the battle. D is a terrible answer and requires us to assume that the self-portrait painter cares about etiquette and I stand by that...

I chose D after deliberating between D and E. I think trying to understand exactly what each answer was saying would have taken too much time to make it worth it, so I guessed. (As JY says, it is an economics game).

Honestly, looking at it now, E would have been the better option for one thing alone, and that is because of the word "probably". The stimulus isn't talking about probability, it states something as a fact. Nothing that talks about probability would be a necessary assumption for this argument.

I chose E. E is not right because the stimulus claims it is "likely" that they built the canoes, not guaranteed. Definitely not a necessary assumption, as JY says it strengthens but does not wreck the argument if false.

I think I looked past B because I was like.... Well, duh. But that is literally what the question is asking me to find lolll #silly

Still think this question requires too large of an assumption from the reader, but I understand how E is the best answer, given the other choices. I played roulette on this one because it pissed me off and was eating up too much of my time,

Had C picked and switched to E last second. There is no generalization being made, so E is wrong.... Always follow intuition

I chose A, pretty unconfidently. But I don't think C was even on my radar, because I perceived it as contradicting the information in the stimulus.

I think the only reconciliation I can make comes from the word "seems" in the stimulus. This word (I guess) implies that humans are making an assumption about the color patterns of animals. I think what would have helped fix this question is if it was laid out like a quote from some animal researcher... As in the stimulus would start with "Animal Researcher: ". This would clarify that we are dealing with human opinions/assumptions, rather than just facts.

In the question, the word "apparent" also helps C become a stronger answer. Perhaps there is no discrepancy, humans are just stupid.

I think I didn't like B because we don't know if all flawed designs that go through multiple drafts end up being good designs. What if they start off terrible, get better, but still aren't "good designs".

I agree and was also between C and E, ultimately choosing E. I did realize, however, I read C wrong and interpreted it to say "even when there was no demand" rather than "even where there was no demand". Seeing my reading mistake, C is infinitely better than E, as it is more relevant to the information actually given in the stimulus. I think it is important to remember: the answer is always in the stimulus.

Also having this problem.

I think it is important to take your time in the beginning. Don't stress too much about tie as you are learning so you can focus on reinforcing pattern recognition. As you get further in your study journey and take more practice tests, then I think time is more of a factor and will probably come natural.

I think it would be something like this:

If goals are met, then most cars are electric.

G --> (C -m-> E)

If the argument can stand alone without the sentence, that sentence is probably context. If the argument needs the sentence to help the conclusion follow, then it is a premise.

Always good to stop the video and fill in the "missing premises" before goes over it. How would you strengthen the argument? What added premises would make YOU believe the conclusion?