Weakening approach: limiting the scope of evidence

"Tend to": correlation

I agree. Comparative statement: failure to acknowledge the other side of the issue (weaken questions similar to resolve/explain)...

I was also amazed by the name...

Legit. Thanks for the etymology...

Also, I like how JY analogizes a weaken question to a resolve/explain question: "the unseen side of the matter".

C: "encouraged": still gap.

Lastly, "say" indicates an example, which is a secondary structure distinct from the main argument. Thus, A and B are wrong.

Also, it's a typical "linking" problem. The necessary assumption needs to build some weak connection between the executives' salary and the lowest-paid employees' salary.

Note: need to review this chapter: https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/existential-quantifiers-overview/.

Crux: negation of "some" relationship.

Comparative argument → what's being compared?

Boldness here.

I cannot discern whether it's a soft MBT question or a necessary assumption question. From the explanation here, it sounds like a necessary assumption question...

Learning: pay attention to the subject of the conclusion.

Key learning: "the only" → sufficient.

C's issue (equivocation)

1) Change of the sentence's subject (similarly, PT 92 Section 1 Q19);

2) The stimulus's conclusion is about "healing". But C, unlike D, does not address "healing" and thus misses the connection with the conclusion.

Does "some" relationship (←s→) not have contrapositive property?

Q12: look for assumption.

I also don't understand the reasoning of the third paragraph. The author seems to suggest judges should adopt a new approach to make their reasoning apparent. But isn't this the practice in common law systems now? Aren't judges already recording their reasoning and holdings in the judicial opinions?

In all, what the author prescribed is not new.

#help (Added by Admin)

I skipped this question because I really don't understand what "has nothing going for it" and "LPs" mean... Had -6 in the end. If this happens on the real exam, I am doomed...

Equivocation with 2 meanings.

Linking issue.

Key: Venn diagram.

I was surprised...

Also for answer choice B: "unless" ↔ "if not". "Not always" ↔ "sometimes not".