Subscription pricing
http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-24-section-2-question-21/
Obvi not C, D, E.
Need help on making A and B distinct. Need a strategy on how to decode the false double negative on all LSAT wording. Need help on answering the question. Thanks
A. No effective law is unenforceable
B. All enforceable laws are effective
0
6 comments
A. No effective law is unenforceable - This statement must be translated to All effective laws are enforceable. Then reverse and negate to get the contrapositive.
Not Enforceable ----> - Effective
We can feed this into our conditional statement in the passage. When - Effective ----> - Law
we combine the two statements
By combining, we see that if a law is not enforceable then it's not effective, we know from the passage if a law is not effective it should not be a law.
Not Enforceable ----> Not Effective ------> Not Law
Thanks to everyone :) I guess the real problem is that I haven't done 7sage yet. Just saying "negate necessary" saved me from so much pain. I didn't realize 7sage was so detailed, and right now, that's the detail I need. I am almost finished with the Trainer, and I am about to start PowerScore tomorrow. If things are still gnarly, I will be doing 7sage. But I already have these resources, so I might as well finish these first. Thanks again
Not sure if it would help, but if I ever freeze translating tricky "no" statements I always think of the example "No cats are dogs" because its translation into "if you are a cat, then you are not a dog" seems intuitive to me. It's just following the principle to negate the necessary, but sometimes a concrete example like this can do the trick to unfreeze me and keep me moving during timed practice.
That question gave me a headache when I first encountered it a long time ago. But @mahdiall408 nailed it. Follow J.Y's principle with negating necessary and negating sufficient when indicators kick in, and you should be fine.
No effective law is unenforceable. If you assume this, then yes you can say that when a law fails to be effective, it should not be a law, BECAUSE no effective law is unenforceable (or translate with lawgic to all effective laws ARE enforceable).
When I did this question I just read it instead of translating as it seemed to make more sense intuitively.
"No" is a group 4 (negate necessary) so whichever condition you make necessary must be negated: all effective laws are enforceable or all unenforceable laws are ineffective. Any way you slice it, they are clearly different from "all enforceable laws are effective."