#help Why does a wider variety assume that the smaller group is a subset. If a store A sells a wider variety of fruit than store B, it doesn't mean that all of the fruit sold at store B is also sold at store A, it just means that store A has more options. Example store A sells pineapples, apples, and cherries, while store B only sells oranges. There is no intersection but store A still sells a wider variety of fruit.

#help How do you know that you can interpret that their current habitat isn't large enough into they need a larger habitat. It seems like an assumption to me, not a big one, but how do you know when you can reinterpret like that.

Can someone help me to find where I went wrong in my thinking, like what general principle I wasn't applying when doing this question. I believed the answer was A at first, but now I understand why C is the answer. But while going through the options, I had in my mind that the argument would have to attack an opposition for a completely irrelevant reason, which led me to disregard C, and all that was left was A, but I didn't pick up on the small detail that there wasn't a real opposition in A, it was just alluded to that some people would may not agree.

#help (Added by Admin)

#feedbackIn the video, JY says that "only" indicates a Group 3 indicator, but it's a Group 2 indicator.

I agree with the answer, but I think the analysis of Meli's argument isn't completely right. When you look at option B, it's supported by Meli's argument because Meli is saying we should limit the population of the mountain lions (a few of a population) in order to save the whole of the lambs (an entire population), so she believes that to saving a population is more important than losing a few individuals.

#feedback I believe for Question 19 the last sentence should say, " it shouldn't be the organization that's providing the essentials for human health."