I guess it's "probably true" question, because the answer B can be true, rather than must be true.

Is there something wrong with the question?

#help (Added by Admin)

The more caffeine, the more irritating acid stimulated? The text only tells us that caffeine stimulates irritating acid. It's quite possible that when caffeine reaches some saturation, more caffeine would lead to less but not no stimulation of irritating acid.

E just refers to published works. If these published works are fictions, they should be submitted by agents or requested from writers. But the works mentioned in answer E are from neither of them. So they are not fictions.

(High) Humidity could be a good thing for computer. That's right. But (low) humidity could be a bad thing for computer. This is right, too.

Hi,

Sorry for mishandling the issue of multiple hashtags. I just meant to edit it but tragically ended up in such a mess.

Thank you for your explanation! :-)

#help “The former (propaganda) is nothing but an attempt to influence behaviors through repetitions of simple slogans ” means both directions, that is, "propaganda (P)↔repetition of simple slogans (R)", or "nothing but = if and only if"? I thought it's just P→R, not R→P. Am I wrong?

#help “The former (propaganda) is nothing but an attempt to influence behaviors through repetitions of simple slogans ” means both "propaganda (P)↔repetition of simple slogans (R)"? I thought it's just P→R, not R→P. Am I wrong?

#help If the phrase "Since then" eliminated, will answer D be invalidated?

#help The stimulus says "it must encure" and C says "cannot determine". I think the latter is a complete negation of the former. So the second necessary condition must be violated and C could be a correct answer. What's wrong with my logic line?

LTF→FCA? I think it ought to be FCA→LTF.

How to GRAPHICALLY imagine (A→B) equals A & B, instead of A→B?

#help (Added by Admin)

I got the right answer but still confused with it. Yes, D is an assumption but it seems not a NECESSARY assumption. lower income taxes→less reluctant to spend(LRS)→ less weak economy(LWE). So LWE could be brought about without LRS.

"the claim regarding the justification"? Which claim? If it's the editorial's claim, that is, the "justification" per se, then the answer should be E. But if the claim refers to the letter author's claim, that is, the "justification" is untenable, then the answer should go to B. And "the claim made in the letter regarding the justification" could hardly understood as the "justification per se", but could conventionally be understood as "comments regarding the justification"(that means "it's not justified". So answer B is correct?

#help (Added by Admin)

I'm kind of being attracted to answer B. Payne meant the data to be REEXAMINED. For me so it could be said "Payne initially doubted (the data)". And later on we have "the data could be CONSISTENTLY read" so we can say "ultimately came to accept". Maybe "had to be reexamined" is just to be cautious, taking no standing, whether it's doubt or belief?

RC pretty tough? That's the easiest RC I've ever seen.

Necessary assumption? Why I deem Answer A a sufficient assumption? If Bacteria, then toxic. A says there is bacteria.

Bila: Belief in inability of looking after themselves

id: Injurious to democracy

l: let-go of any law not harmful to anyone besides the person engaging in it

P: Bila→id

C:~id→l

From P, you can have id → Bila. The gap is Bila →l or l→Bila. In text, it's "prohibiting bla bla → Belief in inability of looking after themselves".

Bila: Belief in inability of looking after themselves

id: Injurious to democracy

l: let-go of any law not harmful to anyone besides the person engaging in it

P: Bila→id

C:~id→l

From P, you can have id→Bila. The gap is Bila→l or l→Bila. In text, it's "prohibiting bla bla → Belief in inability of looking after themselves

If A→B, could it be said B supports A?

This question is labeled as “very hard”. But if you have the correct diagram, it’s pretty easy.

Sep: Solution to Environmental Problems; no-gm: Not the result of Government Mismanagement; CCH: Change in Consumer habits; EE: Economically Enticing

P1: S[ep, no-gm]→CCH→EE

P2:

—————————————————-

C: Sep→EE

It’s very clear that the gap P2 is Sep→S[ep,no-gm]. And how could we have Sep→S[ep,no-gm]? If only ep→[ep,no-gm].

I don't know why the Net alwasy converts my "gm" into "gm" (with the entire sentence slashed). Any way, ep→gm→Sep→S~gm→CHH→EE

This question is labeled as “very hard”. But if you have the correct diagram, it’s pretty easy.

Sep: Solution to Environmental Problems; ~gm: Not the result of Government Mismanagement; CCH: Change in Consumer habits; EE: Economically Enticing

P1: Sep~gm→CCH→EE

P2:

—————————————————-

C: Sep→EE

It’s very clear that the gap P2 is Sep→Sgm. And how could we have Sep→Sgm? If only ep→~gm.

Sorry for the previous loopholes.

This question is labeled as “very hard”. But if you have the correct diagram, it’s pretty easy.

Sep: Solution to Environmental Problems; ~gm: Not the result of Government Mismanagement; CCH: Change in Consumer habits; EE: Economically Enticing

P1: Sep~gm→CCH→EE

P2:

—————————————————-

C: Sep→EE

It’s very clear that the gap P2 is Sep→Sgm. And how could we have Sep→Sgm? If only ep→~gm.

This question is labeled as "very hard". But if you have the correct diagram, it's pretty easy.

S: Solution; ~gm: Not the result of Government Mismanagement; CCH: Change in Consumer habits; EE: Economically Enticing

P1: S~gm→CCH→EE

P2:

----------------------------------------------------

C: S→EE

It's very clear that the gap P2 is S→S~gm.

What are the "non-Europeanized" sorrow songs? Those spirituals in the Jubilee BEFORE they were arranged in a way Northern white critics approved?