yep same thing here!

Honestly I wouldn't worry about it. The vast, vast majority did not have problems and worse case you get to take the test again for free.

This one really tripped me up because it feels like B and E were both saying the same thing: the line played the role of a premise. A premise guarantees the conclusion in a valid argument. By the lines "truth is required for the argument to be true" I figured B was just rephrasing this idea. At the same time, E seems to be doing the same thing, so it felt like either option was correct. However, if you infer the argument is invalid, E does makes more sense because regardless of the arguments validity, it acts as primary evidence.

I agree. It's helpful not only because it's uplifting, but some of the unique strategies these individuals have used can really be beneficial for your own studying

The question stem for this one really confused me and made me get this one wrong. I couldn't tell if it was asking to use the principle to help explain why the application was actually right or whether it was trying to get us to show why the application's view is correct

This one is really tough. I just don't see how A isn't the answer. Just because the ability to store blood within a spleen in one animal (or even mammal) is possible, doesn't mean anything regarding another of a completely different mammal. I understand why B is right at least. ugh

i got this one right mostly because I knew all the other choices were wrong, not because I necessarily knew D was right. It seemed like the right choice, but I was hesitant because it felt too specific. It explicitly mentions how shipping prices could raise the price and make the product more expensive, which made it feel like a sufficient assumption.

I picked B over A and while I get why A is similar to the stimulus, I can't figure out why B is wrong. Can anyone give me an explanation?