I have a really hard time understanding this. I did get B on blind review and it does make sense, but how is E wrong? "serves as an evidence for the truth of its conclusion", i thought the conclusion here is "it would be a mistake to... etc.". B says "...the claim that that the argument concludes is false", which yes, it makes sense because the argument concludes that a certain claim is false. But at the same time, the entire conclusion is that that claim is false right? And the claim mentioned in the question stem is a support for that conclusion, no? What am I misunderstanding here?

This was a very hard question for me because like many have said here, D felt incomplete. I chose E because the paragraph does not begin with an objection, but I did correct it to D on BR. Any suggestions/tips for such dense and confusing answer choices? It was kind of hard to confidently eliminate answers for me here.

I ruled D and E out immediately because they both mentioned economic related things, so they cannot be noneconomic constraints - is that a correct way of thinking? I also ruled B out later because an index of growth is also related to economics.

I was confused between A and C because I could not locate the specific place where absorbing waste was mentioned, but I had it in the back of my mind.

I was confused with A because A does mention a non-economic constraint. Is that interpreted correctly? But A is wrong because it is not the constraint referred to by any school of thought.

While I could not remember the exact place absorbing waste was mentioned while doing this passage, I remembered it vaguely and picked B, because A was just never mentioned in relation to noneconomic constraints.

Just wanna make sure if my thought process and process of elimination was correct or not.

I chose B because I overlooked "perhaps". But apart from that, would B have been correct if that "perhaps" wasn't here?

I interpreted it as following:

1. It is wrong to restrict liberty

1. But it is not wrong if not restricting liberty leads to harm

Can I make that second inference at all?

From the explanations videos, it seems like that if there is an exception to the rule, it does not mean that the opposite of the rule applies to the exception.

But in J.Y.'s video, it is said that if the "perhaps" hadn't been there, then answer choice B would've been correct as an automatic exception.

I don't know if I was completely doing it wrong, but I read "schedules free poetry" as poetry can be scheduled for free and a "poetry reading is scheduled" as something that is scheduled. I don't understand how "schedules free poetry readings" means that there's definitely a poetry reading scheduled on most Wednesdays?

I understand that "people's claim" here is enough to rule this choice out, but I ruled this out because of a directionality problem too, which the explanation video does not mention. Doesn't "values symptomatic of their actions" means values are a symptom/depended on actions, which is different from the conclusion, which claims that actions are a symptom/depended on values. Just want to make sure I understand the word "symptomatic" and the wording of the answer choice correctly.