Hey! I live in San Antonio and would be up for joining a study group. I just messaged you.

I got confused by this and spent a long time understanding it and a long time writing some long a** explanation just for me to accidentally refresh the page. So pretty much:

I picked B, it's wrong because it doesn't guarantee apes are gonna think philosophical things. C is right because if you negate it you can't guarantee that those thoughts are unique to humans simply because they don't use human language. What if dolphin sonar is proof of philosophical thought (no idea if its true it's just an example).

Bro I was so confused by this question I couldn't make the connections. I realized though that the argument is saying hey these guys spend less time on preparing food each week and yet the food is still good, how's that possible? I think the author is implying that spending less time should result in worse nutritional value and yet it doesn't. The correct answer choice kinda reaffirms that implication by saying, okay, given that's true, they don't actually spend less time per meal because they eat less meals in total. Example: John works outside the home and eats like 3 meals a day and spends 300 minutes total (crazy), Nathan works at home and eats like 4 meals a day and spends 400 minutes total (really crazy). The argument is saying John spends less time and yet his meals are just as good. The answer choice says: Hey, you know John eats less meals right? So they spend equal amounts of time on each meal. They both spend about 100 minutes a meal. So even if time = nutritional value, they spend the same time per meal.

I think it's nice, it helps me better predict my performance, which I imagine would help alleviate some of that post test worry.

Honestly when I read this I was convinced there was a flaw because I thought "well what if Corelink's system cost more to use overtime vs QI's and they (the budget committee) only considered initial purchasing cost? sure it would be cheaper to buy x over y right now and seem to fit within the budget but that doesn't mean it would be cheaper long term and it might could actually exceed the budget for the term". This lead me to look for an answer that was also flawed instead of focusing simply on the structure which resulted in me getting it wrong.

Considering structure alone they say QI's system is within the cost limit, Corelink's costs less than QI's, so Corelink's is also within the cost limit. This makes perfect sense if you're considering the information as it is not what it could be.

Answer choice (e) says sharp cheddar is low enough in fat to meet the standard, mild cheddar has less fat than sharp cheddar, so mild cheddar is also low enough in fat to meet the standard . This matches the structure of the stimulus exactly.

TLDR:

stimulus: Q is less than the limit, C is less than Q, so C is also less than the limit.

choice e: S is less than the limit, M is less than S, so M is also less than the limit.