After hearing J.Y. explain this question, it makes perfect sense to me why the answer is E and not C. I am just going to write down a little bit of my thought process here, it might help somebody.

For an MSS question, out of the 5 ACs, your are looking for the 1 that can be supported by the statements above. For this type of question what is really helping me, is making sure the ACs can relate to what we actually know from the stimulus.

Using this above you can eliminate A, B, D

A: We only know it can improve typing speed, not that most people are improved by using this configuration - too strong of a statement.

B: Stimulus does not mention new typewriters and how they are worse than old ones - this is like really irrelevant

D: Stimulus somewhat mentions this, but the opposite and how we will never switch due to the cost and inconvenience. Also, we really do not care if it would benefit society as a whole, benefits like that are never mentioned in the stimulus.

Moving on to the two polarizing answer choices C and E, we will start with the wrong answer choice.

C: Although harder to visualize, (This is the answer I picked during the test AND BR) it does not matter to the early typewriters what kind of innovations would happen in the future. They invented this typewriter, which helps copy things down in a timely and less costly manner, so because there is going to be this innovation in the future, they should make a more inconvenient typing layout so people can type faster in the future? Reading that you should realize how little sense that makes.

E: This is subtly correct, but it is really the only AC with support from the stimulus. We know from the stimulus that typewriters made that layout so people would not be able to type as fast due to jamming. Now in the present, we know that keys do not jam frequently, or at least can be designed that way, for computer keyboards. Therefore, in this hyopthetical situation, where if the keyboard was invented for something that did not jam, of course they would not have to use the clunky, awkward set up of keys.

Ehhh I still do not really like this question even after J.Y.'s explanation. Although J.Y. explains the accident/not accident world for this question very well, the conclusion ONLY claims that large cars and small cars, ALREADY IN AN ACCIDENT, out of that subset, small cars are more likely to get injured. Even if Trucks get it 3 million accidents and small cars get in 100, if 2.9 million of the trucks accidents result in no injury, and the small car gets injured in 90 out of 100, the conclusion is still fine. PoE gets you to the right answer, but D is a really really really weak AC.

When this is the only question that kept you from getting -0 on this LR section :(

Hey I am just putting this comment here to help anyone who also picked B and got confused by the last sentence!

C: technologically feasible, never accepted into society.

Ask ourselves why?

Argument gives one obvious premise after the for:

P: Gives government too much power.

Now lets imagine this was an SA Q, and you needed to link up the premise and conclusion. How would you do it? Well by the last answer in the paragraph, Too much power leads to people distrusting government, which implies never accepted into society, and makes the argument valid.

Looking at it like this, it is obvious that it is a premise in support of the conclusion, and not just a conclusion.

Interested!

I was so confused taking this Q during the test. I saw that P1 literally did not support the conclusion at all, but P2 did such a good job of supporting it that I just ignored P1 :(

Big Takeaway: If there is a premise dangling in a strengthening question, you probably have to support that one.

However, B is also such a hard inference to see in a minute and a half. I feel like most people, myself included, just eliminated it because the a. acid had such little relevance to the argument other than the dangling premise.

Bro I legit got Q21 wrong B/c I thought prey was reffering to the Typh. in AC C, OMG I am so dumb dude I need to go back to elementary school and learn english again.

I'm pretty decent at logic, but this question threw me for a loop timed. However, I still got it right with a little trick that may or may not help you.

I read the Stim, got the idea that License -> Plausible Threat

But for some reason my brain shut down when reading the ACs

However, just looking at them you can get there by POE:

A: "Some" makes this incorrect immediately

and if you look at CDE they all have the exact same logical formula which is

Plausible Threat -> License

Obviously they can't all be correct, so B is the only answer left

I think the biggest key here, in finding the right answer choice, is noticing Carl's referential phrasing.

In the first sentence of Carl's argument, he says, "But such modernizing..". Such moderning, what modernizing? The modernizing Lyle was talking about, the modernizing that makes plays more ACCESIBLE. It is subtle, but Carl does actually talk about accessible, which allows you to pick D, as it is perfect.

I only got this Q wrong because Although I really liked E, the word manuscript threw me off cause ONLY the nonfiction books mentioned the word manuscripts. Obviously though, any book not published is a manuscript.