Found this elsewhere and it was helpful. Answer choice (E) says that most of the time, corporations are engaging in wrongdoing that doesn't harm anyone with the resources to sue. In the second paragraph, the author says that "the fact that private civil litigation requires an identifiable victim with the necessary resources to commence litigation weakens its (civil litigation's) deterrent impact." In other words, most of the time there must not be identifiable victims with the resources to sue. This is essentially what answer choice (E) says as well - most of the time, corporations are harming people who don't have the resources to sue.

If the author concludes, without justification, that only two options exist, that's called a false dilemma. In this case, the author says that it's important to maintain profitability, and based on that premise alone, concludes that only two options remain.

If the author had opened the passage with a statement of fact (e.g., "There are only two ways to win at Game X..." - ie: as a PREMISE), we would have to accept that as true. The author presents a premise and concludes that there are only two options (attempting to base this conclusion on insufficient evidence).

If an author concludes, based on evidence that is insufficient, that only two choices remain, that is a false dilemma.

This question looks like:

CP → /EA

-5 → EA === contrapositive: /EA → /-5

CP → /EA → /-5

_

C: CP → /-5

A→B→C

_

A→C So match this pattern. I would look for repeating terms to try and match this pattern (or referential phrases that would indicate some sort of chain)

(a) Distributing Negations into Conditional Statements - as in "not" all [G1] mammals are without (have no) wings. Bats are mammals and bats have wings.

not (M→/W) ---- distributing the negation: M←s→W. Seeing this piece, you could move to the next AC, since the pattern will not match.

Remainder premises for practice: B→M and B→W

Not same pattern - wrong.

(b) CORRECT.

Conclusion: All [G1] rural districts [RD] are free of major air pollution [MAP] problems. Free meaning... they do not have MAP.

RD → /MAP

Premise: (because) such problems [MAP] occur only where [G2] lots of autos.

MAP→LCA === contrapositive /LCA→/MAP (we do this to match the /MAP above)

Premise: and there are no [G4] such places [ref to LCA] in the rural districts [RD].

RD → /LCA

RD → /LCA → /MAP

Conc: RD→/MAP

A→B→C

_

A→C pattern matched.

Hi - is this still the same / not certain how to find the pinned question, as it seems format has changed. Can you assist?

Still the same problem - I did all options above (in both Chrome and Safari). I'm on a Mac. My browsers are also all up to date.

What was the similar question (just curious)?

I have the same problem.