Clearification please

@LizD What we're looking for is this pattern: Xs are on average bigger/better/etc. than Ys Z is the biggest/best/etc. Z is an X This is a flawed argument since the generality does not necessarily apply to individuals. B mixes this up a bit by saying Xs are bigger/better/etc. than Ys Z is a X Z is bigger/better/etc. See how that's reversed? C, on the other hand, goes with: Xs are bigger/better/etc than Ys Z is big/better/etc Z is an X See how that's the same?