It got me too. Took me a second to realize that it was just the suff and necess flipped around. When translated into lawgic I figured it out.

Purpose in context in Lawgic:

If correct then it accurately describes something the author did.

Correct answer → Describes something the author did

Describes something the author did → Correct answer

Gotta have fun with it man haha

Lol glad it could help!

So is this the SP framework "Here's some background of X, here's what I think, and why?"

Where:

Background = lawyers believe stealing thunder is effective

What (I) Author thinks = the effectiveness of stealing thunder is supported

Why = Psych Explanations 1-4

#feedback

Question about mutual inconsistencies:

I get that an argument with multiple conflicting claims is mutually inconsistent, but do concessions also count as contradicting claims?

To make our lives harder lol.

Accidentally typed my notes in the reply box instead of the notes section so enjoy my notes everyone!

I missed this question because I didn't notice/understand the difference between "Much as" and "As much as" as used in the passage. If the latter was the case, D, which I chose would be correct because the frequency of usage isn't supported, but seeing as it's the former, C is in fact supported...

Whoops, perhaps fuck, as some might say. All good though. Happens to the best of us!

This video is stuck on double speed and none of the options are popping up to slow it down, pause, etc. Anybody have any suggestions? #feedback

E saying physiological instead of psychological really threw me for a loop. I got it right by dumb luck under time but that woulda been helpful if it was spelled out properly. Phew!