#feedback When I do to my drilling mode section, I do not see that I have an "advanced builder" setting. Is this setting, "advanced builder," only available in an upgrade of your account through 7sage? Please let me know.

#feedback for this question: how do we categorize it? Would it be more of an author's attitude question, based on assessing the approaches of evolutionary psychology by the two authors? Just want to make sure I identified the question properly.

For questions 3.1-3.3, I understand in a way how there are two premises, but I feel that it is more accurate to say that there is a major premise and a premise for each question. For example, on 3.3., why is it that "however, this is not a safe and enduring circumstance" is labelled as a premise rather than a major premise? What is it that I am missing when assessing the pattern of these question? PLEASE HELP <3

For question 2.1: I am confused on what the difference is between the major premise/sub-conclusion and the main conclusion. I thought that "Alex must have seen the game-winning goal at the soccer match" was the sub-conclusion and that "Therefore, he must have been in the vicinity of the big screen when the game-winning goal was scored" was the main conclusion. I understand how these claims all support one another, but I do not understand the difference. Please help!

This was the question and answer below:

Question:

Alex must have seen the game-winning goal at the soccer match. Alex admits that he moved from his seat to the concession stand, and there is no way for him to get from his seat to the concession stand without passing the big screen that was showing the match. Therefore, he must have been in the vicinity of the big screen when the game-winning goal was scored. No one could have been anywhere in the vicinity of such an exciting moment and fail to notice it.

Answer:

(Minor) Premise: Alex admits that he moved from his seat to the concession stand, and there is no way for him to get from his seat to the concession stand without passing the big screen that was showing the match.

Major Premise/Sub-Conclusion: Therefore, he must have been in the vicinity of the big screen when the game-winning goal was scored.

Major Premise: No one could have been anywhere in the vicinity of such an exciting moment and fail to notice it.

Main Conclusion: Alex must have seen the game-winning goal at the soccer match.

Could the premise of an argument also be called or is synonymous with the word evidence? What is the difference between premise versus evidence?

I understand how the answer is D. However, I am confused on how to apply the negative test to further prove that this is the correct negative assumption. Can someone help me with this? Thanks! :)

#feedback I understand the explanation of this question and everything, but for future questions like this, how can I make sure and distinguish whether a question like this is MSS or strengthen? While taking this test, I thought it was an MSS question so my approach to this problem was already off.

#help I do not understand question 3: In tall palms, the terminal bud on the main stem is the only one to develop.

- Doesn't "only" signal that develop is the necessary condition, wheres as "the terminal bud on the main stem is sufficient.

I thought that only is in the group two of conditional indicators which means that it signals the necessary condition that comes after it.

Please help! Thanks<3

Can someone please explain why B is not correct? I understand the gap that answer choice D addresses and why it is correct, but doesn't compliance and its relationship to filing taxes matter based on answer choice B? I still do not get how this is wrong, and how B does not address the gap regarding compliance in the stimulus. #feedback