I'm unsure of how Arnot's argument is "inadequate" seeing that we have no real details about it's content. All we know is what is probably the conclusion of his argument, and making an assumption about government being trustworthy to act in the people's interest isn't very "dubious" when we consider the unaddressed "fundamental changes" to government proposed by Arnot. The same assumptions we can have about government now would not necessarily be applicable to it after changing it fundamentally.

I understand the answer, I just really don't like how they worded it.

#feedback

The closed captions do not work for the bulk of this answer explanation.

If a question says "some students", would that not mean it has to be at least 2, because students is in plural, implying there are multiple who can read?

I brushed past A because I read "decline" as "deadline" and ruled it out as irrelevant, but immediately saw that it was correct in BR.

The thing that is still confusing me is how D is not also necessary. It isn't necessary to the premises, because they leave open that there are other possible causes, but the wording of the conclusion, through the word "need", makes D necessary for the conclusion. If there are other explanations, which the premises have hinted at, then the conclusion cannot be properly drawn, because you don't "need" to raise the tuition to increase the applicant pool if there are alternative methods to doing so.

I chose C after nearly three minutes of thinking, then immediately realized it was wrong in blind review because it only said "detailed information", rather than "complete detailed information", and immediately chose D, because every other answer is only talking about "detailed information", which is logically far easier to acquire than "complete detailed information", and therefore entirely irrelevant to the argument.

I didn't like C because it was too vague. If it had said cratering in the Earth-Moon system I would have chosen it, but we don't really have any solid information on whether or not cratering significantly decreased in the rest of the solar system, which for the scientists who believe LHB only effected the Earth and Moon, makes C something they wouldn't necessarily agree with.

For Question 22, I'm confused about how the Social Control Theory makes use of the Whig Fallacy mentioned in the later paragraph. The author talks about modern critics generally, and nowhere specifically says that theorists of Social Control believed Government involvement was necessary, which is a claim that isn't even related to how the author defines the Social Control Theory in the previous paragraph.