For #2, I understand the idea, but why is it flipped so the second part comes first: /not want to learn to ski → over 40, and then want to learn to ski → /over 40? In the other examples, the answer is pulled from the 1st part of the sentence rather than the second part.
@AlexisBeam I tripped up on this one as I thought it wasn't conditional but a fact trying to trick us. "all trees" after reviewing it I see my error but it defiantly got me.
Shouldn't the contra positive of #3 be "if people are not buying OR using less then things do not cost more"? Shouldn't the "and" be swapped to "or" when taking a contra positive?
Original Sentence: I would not be able to see Arun if he were in the next room.
Modified Sentence: If he were in the next room, then I would not be able to see Arun.
Sometimes you need to flip the order of the clauses in a conditional sentence. Think of IF → THEN like a math equation. The sentence has two parts: X and Y.
X is the condition, so it always goes in the “if” part of the sentence.
In this example, “if he were in the next room” is X. Since X is the “if” part, you put it first.
If tree, then perennial plant with elongated stem.
Think of it in a subset-superset relationship: Trees are a class (subset) of perennial plant with elongated stem (superset). There can be other types of perennial plant with elongated stem, but trees is just one example in that class.
If tree, then perennial plant with elongated stem.
Sufficient ->Necessary
If it is a tree->then it must be a perennial plant with elongated stem. In order for it to be a tree, it must be a perennial plant with elongated stem.
It being a tree is suffiecient to say that it is a perennial plant with elongated stem.
***Important note: If the sentence was "Trees are perennial plants with an elongated stem" it will also have the same visual translation in subset-superset relationship.
confused a bit on 4 and this concept in general, what is basing the assumption that it is a complete universal rule without a word like "all?"number five makes complete sense to me because of the phrasing but for example, for number 4, could it not be true that where judges are independent there will be a good legal system AND there is a not good legal system that also happens to have judges that are independent?
@LiviaLSAT But if there's a situation in which the judges are independent but the legal system is not good, how does it make sense to say "where the judges are independent there will be a good legal system"? It seems we'd have a counterexample to that statement in the situation you describe.
There's an implicit "all" here, because when we say "Where condition X is true, Y is true," we're not moderating the claim with "usually" or "most of the time." It just seems to be a blanket statement about situation where condition X is true.
@kaymkol The parentheses is just to keep an entire idea together -- the negation applies to that whole idea. For example, in #5, /(perennial plant with elongated stem) means "NOT a perennial plant with elongated stem." Without the parentheses, someone might read that as "NOT a perennial plant, but WITH an elongated stem".
The parens is really just notation for the computer. If I were drawing this on scratch paper, I'd just put a line through the whole phrase rather than a backslash followed by parens.
I am getting the format right and understanding it decently, however, in all my answers, I didn't put the brackets. Can someone remind me what the point of that is?
@summeraaallen From my own understanding and research, quite necessary haha. I think once you have a good understanding of this, it'll unlock your ability to answer LR questions faster. But, speaking for myself, too, it'll take time and practice.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
266 comments
5/5 lessgetit
For #2, I understand the idea, but why is it flipped so the second part comes first: /not want to learn to ski → over 40, and then want to learn to ski → /over 40? In the other examples, the answer is pulled from the 1st part of the sentence rather than the second part.
@isabellagirjikian
"if" indicates the sufficient condition so "he were over 40" goes first since it directly follows "if"
over 40 -> /want to learn to ski
Then the last step is to do the contrapositive so all you do is flip it and switch the / (not) to the other side.
Want to learn to ski -> /over 40.
IE
if you don't really know this, you won't really master LR.
/understand --> /master LR
master LR --> understand
___
understand --> /worry about the test
worry about the test --> /understand
For #5. Is it okay if I thought about it as IF and THEN?
@AlexisBeam I tripped up on this one as I thought it wasn't conditional but a fact trying to trick us. "all trees" after reviewing it I see my error but it defiantly got me.
@AlexisBeam Yes, but be sure to double check and understand the relationships when you see words like all, some, every, each, any, many etc.
I made flash cards to help memorize group 1-4 conditional indicators, thought I’d share in case it would be helpful to anyone else. I’m redoing this course after getting through most of it and taking the lsat and not doing as well as I hoped. Looking back I realize how important it is to know these. https://quizlet.com/1153975729/lsat-7sage-conditional-indicators-to-share-flash-cards/?i=71yhg9&x=1jqY
@Elideebeep Thank you so much!
@Elideebeep Thank you
@LindaLopez of course!
@Kamillechernandez599 no problem!
Shouldn't the contra positive of #3 be "if people are not buying OR using less then things do not cost more"? Shouldn't the "and" be swapped to "or" when taking a contra positive?
trees → perennial plant with elongated stem LA KNIGHT: "YEAAAAAAAAH"..
5 out of 5, and that feels very good, seeing how things were when I first started. This used to be a foreign language to me.
I do not understand why I still find number 1 confusing, can someone explain it for me? please
@andrearovelo
Original Sentence: I would not be able to see Arun if he were in the next room.
Modified Sentence: If he were in the next room, then I would not be able to see Arun.
Sometimes you need to flip the order of the clauses in a conditional sentence. Think of IF → THEN like a math equation. The sentence has two parts: X and Y.
X is the condition, so it always goes in the “if” part of the sentence.
In this example, “if he were in the next room” is X. Since X is the “if” part, you put it first.
Yessss, I am doing great with these so far!
can someone explain 5 to me? I get the conditional indicator "All" but it didn't feel like, if and then, Maybe I'm overthinking?
@LamontNarcisse It goes like,
If tree, then perennial plant with elongated stem.
Think of it in a subset-superset relationship: Trees are a class (subset) of perennial plant with elongated stem (superset). There can be other types of perennial plant with elongated stem, but trees is just one example in that class.
If tree, then perennial plant with elongated stem.
Sufficient ->Necessary
If it is a tree->then it must be a perennial plant with elongated stem. In order for it to be a tree, it must be a perennial plant with elongated stem.
It being a tree is suffiecient to say that it is a perennial plant with elongated stem.
***Important note: If the sentence was "Trees are perennial plants with an elongated stem" it will also have the same visual translation in subset-superset relationship.
confused a bit on 4 and this concept in general, what is basing the assumption that it is a complete universal rule without a word like "all?"number five makes complete sense to me because of the phrasing but for example, for number 4, could it not be true that where judges are independent there will be a good legal system AND there is a not good legal system that also happens to have judges that are independent?
@LiviaLSAT But if there's a situation in which the judges are independent but the legal system is not good, how does it make sense to say "where the judges are independent there will be a good legal system"? It seems we'd have a counterexample to that statement in the situation you describe.
There's an implicit "all" here, because when we say "Where condition X is true, Y is true," we're not moderating the claim with "usually" or "most of the time." It just seems to be a blanket statement about situation where condition X is true.
4/5! Got the 1st one wrong because by changing the order I was changing the meaning, once I realized my mistake it was smooth sailing from there!
Hello! Can someone better explain the use of parentheses when taking the contrapositive in Group One translations? Thank you!
@kaymkol The parentheses is just to keep an entire idea together -- the negation applies to that whole idea. For example, in #5, /(perennial plant with elongated stem) means "NOT a perennial plant with elongated stem." Without the parentheses, someone might read that as "NOT a perennial plant, but WITH an elongated stem".
The parens is really just notation for the computer. If I were drawing this on scratch paper, I'd just put a line through the whole phrase rather than a backslash followed by parens.
@Kevin_Lin Thank you so much for this explanation!
Why would it be want to learn to ski -> /over 40? Shouldn't there be a "/" in front of the want to learn to ski?
Edit: Is it because of the negative in the original statement: "Amar would NOT want to learn to ski..."?
@EliseBoessler Yes. Start with "If", which introduces the sufficient condition:
over 40 --> NOT want to learn
Then, the contrapositive (switch both sides and negate each side. If it starts out negative, then whne you negate it, it turns positive):
Want to learn --> NOT over 40
I am getting the format right and understanding it decently, however, in all my answers, I didn't put the brackets. Can someone remind me what the point of that is?
@DeborahAdel I think it's just there way of making it clear that they are negating the statement /(...). So it will look clearer
okay like how necessary is it for me to rlly know this lol
@summeraaallen From my own understanding and research, quite necessary haha. I think once you have a good understanding of this, it'll unlock your ability to answer LR questions faster. But, speaking for myself, too, it'll take time and practice.
@TeddyShane appreciate you. been hard to pay attention because it feels so common sense yk
@summeraaallen if you don't really know this, you won't really master LR.
/understand --> /master LR
master LR --> understand
___
understand --> /worry about the test
worry about the test --> /understand
I understood it but where to place each idea messed me up.
Doe matter which side I put each idea being related? Because it looks like I mix them up quite often compared to the answers.
@GabGauthier yes it matter. on the right side of the arrow will be the sufficient condition and the left side of the arrow is the necessary condition.
@KeziaH19 are you sure its not the opposite
The lesson on negation versus opposition was really helpful here.
4/5. Got mixed up on Q3
5/5!
5/5, we got this!! It's all just formula!
Premises don't have to be true to have a valid arguement. It was good to be able to recall that on 4!
It was also good to refer back to refentials, constant reminders and call backs.
I needed this burned into my brain: if x, then y.
If X -> Then Y
X -> Y
If he were over 40 (X), then Amar would not want to learn to ski /(Y).
The contrapositive is if not Y, then not X.
/Y -> /X
If amar would NOT not want to learn to ski (if he would want to learn to ski), then he is NOT over 40.
Caution: This is not the same as "only if."
@william.l.dillon Would it not be to change x-> /y to. y->/x