love hearing JY mention Bolivia

Why can we make assumptions with E but not B. We assume those people in the study are part of this weird group for AC E, why can't we assume they eat a lot of fiber? Or is it that you only have to assume one thing for AC E, but also have to assume salt is not the most important important factor.

I don't understand why D is wrong. I chose AC: B and I still feel like it's better than D. But the idea that its lap time vs swim meet that makes it wrong feels off. Lap time directly relates to swim meet wins. It's not an outrageous reach nor is it even really a reach, that is what most meets are based on. One could make the same nitpicky argument against B as hired engagements are different than playing engagements, slightly but still, if we are nitpicking.

I don't know if I have the law hat on too much but I think the reasoning for this stimulus is really poor.

Excessive Development -> Damage Environment

Excessive Development -> hurts industry

Things we know (hurts industry->don't do it)

Thus they would never knowingly damage the seaside envirornment

No, they would just never do it through excessive development. They might find a system of four-toed mud-crabs that needs to be moved to accommodate their sewage system and might cause the endangerment of such a species but so long as it doesn't damage the industry by making it unappealing to tourists it would be ok in its actions.

I got this one wrong on regular and BR. I chose answer choice B, but I disagree with the way JY set up the initial framework. One can teach in the French department and not necessarily teach a language course, they could teach French movies for instance. I interpreted the second statement as just fluff. Will fluff ever be a part of parallel the method of reasoning questions?

I got this wrong originally and right after BR. I was stuck on this problem originally and then realized the stim wasn't a good argument. Should I not assume that arguments in the stim are generally good arguments?

Interested!

I got confused by E. The fact the passage specifically included Frank's opinion gave the feeling that the author of the passage agreed with him. Am I wrong for making that connection?

#help (Added by Admin)

I think the main conclusion of the passage is the implication of the first sentence, that people should not neglect to vote. I got the question right but was slightly confused as well.