Is there any case where an interjection like the one in the conclusion can be a part of the premise? How can we be so sure that it isn't an additional premise? #help

PT 46, S1 is an RC section no?

Couldn't AC A be addressing that the correlation does not have any relationship at all? #help I understand that the word "many" could mean 1, but what if it said "most", wouldn't that be enough to state that the correlation presented has no relationship?

Wouldn't this question be a SA because of the question stem?#help

@jhaldy10325 Yes!

Thank you so much to everyone for your comments! They have been really helpful :)

I'm mostly getting 3 and 4 star questions wrong. The easier questions are all right. > @chrleesj368 said:

Is it because you are running out of time or because you are getting the answers wrong?

This question is an MSS since the question states "leads to a conclusion", it doesn't ask us to identify the conclusion within the stimulus; it's asking us to piece together a conclusion. Even though MSS questions require us to pick a more generalized answer, the subconclusion of the stimulus states that "the best strategy for attracting residents is to renovate the train station", and the conclusion only adds to the fact that B is the correct answer since it adds towards the subject of renovated train stations.

With Weakening and Strengthening Quesitons, I take the ACs as Truth, so I try not to make any assumptions. I think the important thing to remember is that in the other ACs the language isn't strong enough compared to AC D, and AC D creates a world that completely destroys the support between the premise and the conclusion, so that's why it's the correct AC.

lol how in the world does this stimulus constitute Communism

Isn't AC E essentially saying the opposite of the causal relationship: "All people who have pets admit to feeling happy sometimes." I choose answer choice E because All is more encompassing than Most. #help

Same here

How does "the only" express "if and only if" in this case?

#help (Added by Admin)

What is the negation of AC A?#help

Would this be a False Dichotomy flaw?

#help (Added by Admin)

I understand that without the sufficient condition the whole argument falls apart, but I don't understand how it would work logically given the relationship between the conditionals.

For example:

IGA→A +U→/F

F→/A or/ U→/IGA

In order to conclude that the book is flawed, you have to conclude that it does not satisfy the /A or the /U (which they don't), and then we have to conclude that the book is not intended for a general audience.

So shouldn't the answer be that the necessary assumption is that the book is not intended for a general audience, in order to conclude that the book is flawed?

#help (Added by Admin)

Hello! Where did you find the information for how the answer choice will format in relation to the stimulus?

For answer choice E, shouldn't the conclusion be translated like as V←s→/OT, instead of the most statement? #help

Some statements are interchangable!

I don't understand how you translate the conclusion of the stimulus. How does, "there are no edible daises, at least not any that are palatable" translate into D ←s→EP, if we have a conditional indicator?

#help (Added by Admin)

AC C: It relies on evidence that does not indicate the number of people who get insomnia from drinking a lot of coffee. Answer choice C points to the flaw since the stimulus concludes that Tom is most likely an insomniac from drinking a lot of coffee, but we can't know that because, like answer choice C states, we don't have the evidence that "C-->I".

Isn't hypothesis 2 a matter of opinion? They're assuming that there are a lot of celestial significant directions and that therefore having a lot of stones, makes it probable for one of them to be pointing towards a significant point. That is why answer choice D made sense to me. #help

If C would've said: "Some legal voters are professors", would that be considered correct?

#help (Added by Admin)