@180 i have trouble doing formal logic chains too! for this question (and all assumptions), you just need to find the missing link. in this case, the new element introduced at the end is intellectual discipline. so, when looking at the ACs, i looked for two elements: 1) intellectual discipline, and 2) freedom of thought. from there, think back to the argument. it is saying that freedom of thought and intellectual discipline are incompatible, and thus freedom of thought as an argument fails. this is exactly what (C) supports. (E) is wrong because it doesn't tell us that they're incompatible, just that without ID, there is no FOT.

I was stumped by this question because for AC (C), I thought it was wrong because the passage never offers an EXAMPLE of the type of role that can be played, it just says that these Pico workers suggested that NEW ROLES could be played. I thought that if (C) were to be correct, we'd see exactly what type of role (Ex: labor, fishing, cooking, business, lol) was being talked about ...

@Jineen I've been trying to read more classics & biographies/nonfiction books!

@gcoleman124 I think you misunderstood the conclusion of the argument! The author is saying that although there were serious social problems, they were the result of a severe dry spell (basically saying that the dry spell = the cause for the collapse). With this conclusion in mind, we can see that (B) doesn't strengthen this argument, since (B) would support social problems as the main cause of collapse, instead of dry spells.

reading these questions in kevin's voice is highkey helping me go slower and get them correct :]

@maxwellmoose45 I think they mean blind review questions that you flagged or got wrong!