I understand that a strong argument will have less assumptions and a weak argument will have more assumptions, but what makes the assumptions of a strong argument more reasonable than assumptions of a weak argument? I guess I am not understanding the whole "reasonable" aspect of this concept.

I am having a hard time differentiating between 'perspectives' and 'narrator.' For example, in this paragraph I thought that this was still just the author giving their neutral perspective. However, it is Chapin's perspective. Any tips?

Why and when would this be beneficial or helpful on a test?

I thought we couldn't put the arrows backwards?

#help Can someone explain to me why A is incorrect?

I don't understand how we don't have the conditions to know what is morally right...

I'm interested!

What are group 3 rules? I may have missed a lesson.