How come we shouldn't use opening sentences that sound like a conclusion as the conclusion?

5.1: Explain

6.1: I got the answer right but I don't remember learning about background information and observation.

11.1: explain

13.1: explain

#help Added by Admin

#help #feedback

It's hard to understand when we should bring real-world logic/common to answer questions. On one hand, I hear not to do this, and on the other hand, I hear that it makes more sense to place a stronger assumption on tigers being mammals vs. tigers being "Aggressiveness and the potential to cause serious injuries to people make an animal unsuitable as a pet."

4.1: I'm not sure why "So we should try it." should be considered as a conclusion. I thought that was the author's way of ending the sentence. I need an explanation on why the premises is a premise.

5.2: I need help identifying the difference between " So he knows he did something wrong" and "He knows that doing what is not permitted without first seeking permission is wrong" and why one of them is the conclusion.

9.1: I used the question 8.2 to conclude that this was not an argument, and I was wrong. How do I know when to not use an assumption? I didn't want to assume/conclude that "Thus, most chefs can make a delicious omelet." would back the other claims: "Most chefs have extensive culinary knowledge. Furthermore, all chefs with extensive culinary knowledge can make a delicious omelet." How do I properly answer problems like this?

#help #feedback