Hit the like if you get the easy ones wrong and the hard ones right

Literally who is drawing that out correctly. Not me

Same

Finally

Amen

These questions are brutal

ALV is right lmao

This question has me questioning my I.Q.

Wow you are amazing for this.

Same

Huh?

My problem is that i get used to the difficult questions that I then overthink the simplest ones and get the wrong smh

Lmao

This

I was stuck on this section for 3 weeks. After reading some of the responses in the comments i was finally able to understand and make progress.

I thought it was because it was its own clause.

Thanks for the great explanations in the comments. I had a mini panic attack when i didn’t understand the video or explanation.

Same

Very impressed by the way this is framed and explained.I feel like i learned so much!

The way I have best deciphered these is to create the chart beforehand because it tells the story.

Context:

Premise:

conclusion:

And the most important thing to remember is: What is the point here(conclusion)? and what supports(premise) that point? Sometimes its better to start with the support. Because if the support isn’t following the conclusion you aren’t outlining it right. For example: The premise states “ It shows Aladdin interacting with other street urchins and surviving by using his wit and trickery.” So you may ask, what is that statement supporting? >> (conclusion)” Aladdin is given a new backstory that involves life in the city before he became a 'street rat'. ” And the rest would be context, important but not extremely relevant.

Context: The character Aladdin, first introduced in the eponymous 1992 Disney movie, has become a beloved figure in pop culture. Given his well-known status and several reiterations of his story, one might presume that there is nothing else to reveal about this character.

Premise: It shows Aladdin interacting with other street urchins and surviving by using his wit and trickery.

conclusion: Aladdin is given a new backstory that involves life in the city before he became a 'street rat'

So if you are like me I originally determined that the premise was "Before the increase in fuel prices, people with average incomes could afford to drive their cars frequently for leisure activities and I surmised that the conclusion was "However, the rise in fuel prices has now made it costly for them to engage in such activities. Apparenly i was wrong, so I deciphered this question in a simpler way.

Going back to basics:

A premise: Gives support.

A conclusion: Receives support.

A premise + conclusion= argument

And the statement "Before the increase in fuel prices people with average incomes could afford to drive their cars frequently." doesn't really give support to said conclusion "the rise in fuel prices has made it costly to engage in such activities", and likewise the conclusion doesn't receive the support needed to make it an arguement, so therefore it is also a statement.

would be different if an additional statement were added like, " Therefore people are driving their cars less frequently" and then we would have the following argument:

Premise : Before the increase in fuel prices, people with average incomes could afford to drive their cars frequently for leisure activities. However, the rise in fuel prices has now made it costly for them to engage in such activities

Conclusion: Therefore now people are driving their cars less frequently

But idk correct me if I'm wrong.