The video doesn't work :)

I kept getting type #4 of question wrong, so sharing in case it helps someone:

I was focusing on this:

→ since “potions in the witch’s hut” are a subset of “all potions,” and every potion has some beneficial effects, then potions in the hut also have some benefits.

That’s actually correct but it’s not the key inference the question is testing.

What we should be thinking is:

→ “Most A are B” guarantees that some A are B → “All A are C” means those same A are also C

So combining: Some potions in the witch’s hut are poisonous, and those same potions have beneficial effects.

Conclusion: → Some things are BOTH poisonous AND have beneficial effects.

The shift that helped me: Don’t stop at subset reasoning. Look for the overlap that satisfies both statements.

I cannot see the purpose of this to be honest :)

Is "Comparative Format" a definitive Predictor?

The stimulus is entirely comparative: it sets up a gap between what people expect versus what actually happens.

Answer Choice (E) uses the exact same comparative structure ("more often than is actually the case").

My question is:

How much weight should we give to this structural coincidence? Is a comparative stimulus a guarantee that the correct answer must also be in a comparative format? Or is it possible for the correct answer to be written as a functional statement without the than marker?

I’m trying to determine if hunting for this format match is a reliable shortcut or a potential trap :)