I have the same doubt

I understand how this can be seen as strengthening the reasoning, but wouldn't this also be adding an alternative hypothesis instead of enforcing the original conclusion.

I got it right; however, it took me like 4 minutes to get the answer. What is the best tip to find the answer as fast as possible?

Although I do understand that in order for there to be few, there must be at least one. Is this the reason why it wouldn't work?

If I want to negate the relationship with "most," is it possible for me to use the word "few" as a negation? The reason I'm asking this is because "few" represents less than half and "most" represents more than half.

Example: Negation to question 3 would be, "Few types of pasta are made from wheat."

When you take the contrapositive of the conditional argument, you are practically saying the same thing in a different way. (If A, then B) is the same thing as (if not A, then not B). But that is not what we are trying to prove here

What we are trying to prove here is a negation of the relationship. So practically saying that A can occur even if we don't have B.

Can anyone let me know if my explanation is correct?!

Interested