finally got 5/5!! Glad I caught the context in #4 and didn't focus too much on indicators. I'm trying to make sure locating indicators in secondary to figuring out proper context of indicator words.
Do the sufficient conditions always come first in the
A -> B? I've been treating A as always a sufficient and B always as a necessary, but these exercises are making me think that's wrong. If that is wrong, how do we know what poses as "A"?
The thing that has helped me the best is trying to think of these are the subset/superset and then build the Lawgic based off of that.
Another thing I keep in mind is the idea that, membership in the subset in necessary for membership in the superset, BUT membership in the superset is not sufficient for membership in the subset.
Translation: If I am inside my room, I am also inside of my house (If I am in the subset, I am also in the superset).
BUT if I am in my house that does not mean I am in my room (If I am in the superset, that does not mean I am in the subset, there maybe some other door I need to enter before I can be in the subset)
I really struggled with this one (got many wrong) any tips? They all seem so relative like either or clause could be sufficient or necessary... what am I missing?
I struggled with this section. One thing that helps to think about for which part is sufficient and which necessary is to give counterexamples that are the negation of each clause.
For example, on question 2: "Businesses do the environmentally “right” thing only if doing so makes good business sense." We have 2 clauses:
Do ... right thing ...
Makes good business sense ...
To give a negation example, let's ask "What if doing so makes only ok business sense? Can businesses do the environmentally right thing then?" No, it is explicitly stated that businesses do the right thing *only* when doing so makes "good" business sense. There is a restriction.
On the other hand, let's ask "If businesses do an environmentally 'neutral' thing (or a 'wrong' thing), does doing so have to mean that action does not make good business sense?" No, we're not restricted given the information we have. The action could be environmentally neutral and make a lot of good business sense.
So we know that the clause "Good business sense..." is the necessary part (which doesn't rely on the action being environmentally "right").
Realllllly struggled with any of variation of "only" statements until I realized that:
“The only” → sufficient
“Only / only if / only when” → necessary
“The only” singles out a group and says that all of them must satisfy some property. That’s the same pattern as “all” or “every.”
Examples:
The only students invited are seniors.
Translation: If you're invited, you're invited, you're a senior
Symbolize: Invited → Senior
The only animals in the room are cats.
Translation: Every animal in the room is a cat.
Symbolize: In room → Cat
The only oral myths that survived are the ones written down.
Translation: All the oral myths that survived were written down.
Symbolize: Survived → Written down
This concept really really frustrated me for a long time and made me feel like I was stupid!! I hope this can help anyone else going through something similar <3
Question 3 is confusing for me as well. I wanted to ask the group a question. How would I diagram the nest in the summit of the Andes and the highest birds of prey nest?
So if the key word is in the beginning the x —-> y is backwards……??..? I’m lost on #3 why wouldn’t it be if you’re the highest flying bird of prey you nest in the summits of Andes?
Why is it if you nest in the summits of the Andes you are the highest flying birds of prey? Is it a general rule if the keyword (only) is in the beginning it is going to be backwards ? Pls guide Ty
3
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
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.
127 comments
test before this humbled me, finally clicking for me....for now
1/5. Losing my mind
finally got 5/5!! Glad I caught the context in #4 and didn't focus too much on indicators. I'm trying to make sure locating indicators in secondary to figuring out proper context of indicator words.
Do the sufficient conditions always come first in the
A -> B? I've been treating A as always a sufficient and B always as a necessary, but these exercises are making me think that's wrong. If that is wrong, how do we know what poses as "A"?
is whenever a sufficient keyword for number 5?
my first 5/5, i used to pray for times like this
I got N. 4 Wrong
4/5
5/5 We getting there!!!!
I just have to remember what the indicator words are. If I have a list next to me, I always get it right.
5/5
i don't have too much of a problem translating them, but I'm having a difficult time understanding what side goes on either arrow, can someone help
The thing that has helped me the best is trying to think of these are the subset/superset and then build the Lawgic based off of that.
Another thing I keep in mind is the idea that, membership in the subset in necessary for membership in the superset, BUT membership in the superset is not sufficient for membership in the subset.
Translation: If I am inside my room, I am also inside of my house (If I am in the subset, I am also in the superset).
BUT if I am in my house that does not mean I am in my room (If I am in the superset, that does not mean I am in the subset, there maybe some other door I need to enter before I can be in the subset)
Example of how I drew out the first 3 questions
I really struggled with this one (got many wrong) any tips? They all seem so relative like either or clause could be sufficient or necessary... what am I missing?
Reminder:
Group 1 Indicators indicate sufficient conditions
Ex: If, When, Where, All, Every, Any
Translation Rule: The idea immediately following the conditional indicator is the sufficient condition.
...whereas...
Group 2 Indicators indicate necessary conditons
Ex: Only, Only if, Only when, Only where, Always, Must
Translation Rule: The idea immediately following the logical indicator is the necessary condition
omg 5/5 I can't believe it.
How do we determine which part of the statement is X or Y if:
X --> Y
For example, why is it :
microscopic organism → capable of feeling pain
and NOT
capable of feeling pain --> microscopic organism
He said WHENEVER was in Group 1. I could not find it among the indicator words in GROUP 1. What am I missing?
I struggled with this section. One thing that helps to think about for which part is sufficient and which necessary is to give counterexamples that are the negation of each clause.
For example, on question 2: "Businesses do the environmentally “right” thing only if doing so makes good business sense." We have 2 clauses:
Do ... right thing ...
Makes good business sense ...
To give a negation example, let's ask "What if doing so makes only ok business sense? Can businesses do the environmentally right thing then?" No, it is explicitly stated that businesses do the right thing *only* when doing so makes "good" business sense. There is a restriction.
On the other hand, let's ask "If businesses do an environmentally 'neutral' thing (or a 'wrong' thing), does doing so have to mean that action does not make good business sense?" No, we're not restricted given the information we have. The action could be environmentally neutral and make a lot of good business sense.
So we know that the clause "Good business sense..." is the necessary part (which doesn't rely on the action being environmentally "right").
Realllllly struggled with any of variation of "only" statements until I realized that:
“The only” → sufficient
“Only / only if / only when” → necessary
“The only” singles out a group and says that all of them must satisfy some property. That’s the same pattern as “all” or “every.”
Examples:
The only students invited are seniors.
Translation: If you're invited, you're invited, you're a senior
Symbolize: Invited → Senior
The only animals in the room are cats.
Translation: Every animal in the room is a cat.
Symbolize: In room → Cat
The only oral myths that survived are the ones written down.
Translation: All the oral myths that survived were written down.
Symbolize: Survived → Written down
This concept really really frustrated me for a long time and made me feel like I was stupid!! I hope this can help anyone else going through something similar <3
5/5 this time :)
4/5 :)
For question 4 I saw the word some as one of the main concepts and linked the other part together. I keep doing that...
Question 5 is confusing for me. Why plant material mixed into garden soil comes first, not the bacteria?
Question 3 is confusing for me as well. I wanted to ask the group a question. How would I diagram the nest in the summit of the Andes and the highest birds of prey nest?
Is the nest the superset or the subset?
So if the key word is in the beginning the x —-> y is backwards……??..? I’m lost on #3 why wouldn’t it be if you’re the highest flying bird of prey you nest in the summits of Andes?
Why is it if you nest in the summits of the Andes you are the highest flying birds of prey? Is it a general rule if the keyword (only) is in the beginning it is going to be backwards ? Pls guide Ty