This one was a lot tougher to me compared to many questions in the high 160 range.

Now I know what segmentation means lol.

these are the easiest types of question in my opinion.

I thought it was a but I didn't know what repudiate meant. So I went with B.............

So, with MC questions you want to ID the conclusion and then just find the AC that paraphrases that conclusion. However, I could not find the conclusion here. MC in LR is different than Mc questions in RC btw yall.

took me 3 minutes but I got it. I gotta lock in to get it done faster.

are application and inferred questions the same?

is the actual test mostly 3/5 difficulty or at least on average? Or is it closer to 4.

#feedback I noticed that this question is in the same category as the travellier question and all other (weaken) questions. But they are solved completely different the travellier question and may other weakens questions we were told to find an alternative hypothesis that cut offs the claim. But here instead of finding an alternative hypothesis to weaken the claim, we are just going to totally disprove the whole argument. In the past weaken questions we always were told to disprove it with a stronger hypothesis not an answer choice that tries to weaken the whole thing however here we are told the opposite. Yet it is grouped in the same category as (weaken) questions but this question asks, "provides evidence against" so are "which answer weakens" and "provide evidence against" not both weakens style questions if they require different methods to solve?????

If you negate B, it would ruin the argument though. Goes to show that strategy is not always effective.

.