I negated the wrong sufficient in 4 to make the lawgic more coherent. What a silly mistake.

For question 5, could the domain also be an organization whose primary purpose is the promotion of health?

From there, the logic follows that - necessary ---> provided

Although, that's not what the sentence tells us now that I type that out. The sentence tells us that what's necessary SHOULD BE provided. CRAP!

provided ---> necessary?

Could something be provided but it wasn't necessary?

Darn!

I almost had question 2 until it came to chaining. "He cannot kill both Arya and Sansa."

I saw a conditional statement but the statement wasn't conditional. "If he does not kill Arya, then he will kill Sansa" .

What it's basically saying is: /(A ^ S)

1. Both can be killed

2. One or the other can be killed

I got the answer right initially and then my blind review took me to 'A'.

Would be really helpful to get why this isn't the correct answer in another way.

Because the argument doesn't state anywhere corporations which do not use posters, then we shouldn't bring this in to criticize the argument, correct?

So nice to get a tricky one right. The last one. What helped me...seeing "It was revered and considered invaluable to the people" prompted me to ask "why should I believe that" to which there was no point or premise.

Where can I practice more questions like this to get to mastery?