im confused you say pick either idea and make it necessary condition. I figured that in conditional logic, the hardest part was confusing sufficent with necessary clause. How can we just pick either idea, when one is the sufficient (trigger) from a nesseary result?
I see how the words for group 3 need at least two clauses, and words of group 4 can start with one clause. Am I right?? Would this be a right way to understand this
I've studied for the LSAT on and off for literal years and always struggled with this concept because I was initially taught a "no torpedo" method (iykyk). This method is GOLD!! So simple and easy.
I don't get how you can just pick any idea and choose if it's going to be the sufficient or necessary condition. Shouldn't we understand what the sentence is trying to say too?
Maybe this gets covered in another lesson, but what do we do if we see "most" or "some" in support for a claim on a test question?
Ex: All public places are comfortable. Most public places that are well-designed have art.
When I'm translating I'm stuck on what to do. I think a good rule of thumb is that you pretty much ignore "most" or "some" claims that show up in stimulus and answers?
#feedback#HELP!!!!! Okay I need help from someone. With the negate necessary I'll type out my thought process "None of the Americans attended the dictators party." I looked at that and noticed that its the group 4 indicator words. So I thought. /A----/D so I assigned /A because it says none of the Americans. Then I assigned /D because you have to negate the necessary claim but that's not correct. It is comparing Americans to the Dictators party. A---/D. What im saying is why do I keep assigning the None to Americans. What I think I see is that the none is the indicator word and it cannot act as an indicator word and a negation at the same time.
Someone please help me with this give some examples that use no, none, and negations in the same sentence.
Quick question here: In the example wouldn't the translation be "if one is one of the Americans, then etc" OR "if one attended the dictator's party then one is not one of the Americans"?? I know this is small but presumably, there could be a group of Americans that the example is not referring to. Rather it is referring to some group of "the Americans" that according to the author could not include the broad group of all Americans. Am I right about this?
So, is there such a thing as a true necessary condition, or is this exercise mainly about understanding the prompt, since we can turn any condition into a necessary one just by negating it when these specific indicators are present?
I've done a whole course and watched so many videos, and this is the first one that's truly made sense to me thank you.
I found the other methods tended to work 90% of the time, but became tricky when the language got more confusing.
I at first learned with Power scores "unless" rule which is ultimately the same thing( when you see unless, put the word following unless as necessary and then negate the sufficient.) The problem with this rule is it would really trip me up when group 3 and group 4 rules got combined. This makes a lot more sense relationship wise and it clicked seeing the relationship between the normal and the contrapositive.
2
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.
84 comments
im confused you say pick either idea and make it necessary condition. I figured that in conditional logic, the hardest part was confusing sufficent with necessary clause. How can we just pick either idea, when one is the sufficient (trigger) from a nesseary result?
Sufficient conditions:
if, when, where, all, every, any
Necessary conditions:
only, only if, only when, only where, always, must
Negate, sufficient:
or, unless, until, without
Negate, necessary:
no, none, not both, and cannot
So is the only/best way to identify these conditions to memorize all of the indicator words? Because there are a LOT of them lol
What if the thing you negate is already negative? Do you just positive it?
I remember this by: The "No" Group
All of group 4 words, even if they don't contain the word no, essentially mean no.
-NO
-NOne
-NOt Both
-CanNOt
-Never
(Never doesn't work as well for the mnemonic but it is fine)
Just had a quick question. Might be a stupid one
I see how the words for group 3 need at least two clauses, and words of group 4 can start with one clause. Am I right?? Would this be a right way to understand this
#J.Y. Feedback.
You should have said 'never' in your original video, monkey.
(-_-)
'Never' is missing from this list
So if my subject of choice is on the right side of the arrow it is necessary, and on the left side it is sufficient?
A --> B (A is sufficient)
B --> A (A is necessary)
This right?
I've studied for the LSAT on and off for literal years and always struggled with this concept because I was initially taught a "no torpedo" method (iykyk). This method is GOLD!! So simple and easy.
I don't get how you can just pick any idea and choose if it's going to be the sufficient or necessary condition. Shouldn't we understand what the sentence is trying to say too?
Group 4 logical indicators: no, none, not both, cannot
Group 4 rule: You pick either idea, then negate that idea, then make that idea the necessary condition.
If I did it like:
Idea 1: American attended
Idea 2: Dictator's party
Negate Idea 1 and make it "necessary": dictator's party -> /American attended
Translate to English: If it's a dictator's party, then no American attended
Would this still be correct? I think I messed up at breaking up the predicate?
Maybe this gets covered in another lesson, but what do we do if we see "most" or "some" in support for a claim on a test question?
Ex: All public places are comfortable. Most public places that are well-designed have art.
When I'm translating I'm stuck on what to do. I think a good rule of thumb is that you pretty much ignore "most" or "some" claims that show up in stimulus and answers?
#feedback#HELP!!!!! Okay I need help from someone. With the negate necessary I'll type out my thought process "None of the Americans attended the dictators party." I looked at that and noticed that its the group 4 indicator words. So I thought. /A----/D so I assigned /A because it says none of the Americans. Then I assigned /D because you have to negate the necessary claim but that's not correct. It is comparing Americans to the Dictators party. A---/D. What im saying is why do I keep assigning the None to Americans. What I think I see is that the none is the indicator word and it cannot act as an indicator word and a negation at the same time.
Someone please help me with this give some examples that use no, none, and negations in the same sentence.
Has anyone found an easy way to memorize all of these indicators
I was wondering, do you think we should memorize all of the indicator words for all four groups?
What would be an example sentence with "not both"?
Just to confirm, the formula is always: Sufficient condition → Necessary condition
Meaning, the sufficient is always on the left and necessary on the right?
Quick question here: In the example wouldn't the translation be "if one is one of the Americans, then etc" OR "if one attended the dictator's party then one is not one of the Americans"?? I know this is small but presumably, there could be a group of Americans that the example is not referring to. Rather it is referring to some group of "the Americans" that according to the author could not include the broad group of all Americans. Am I right about this?
So you can only do this if the specific conditional indicators listed for this video are present in the sentence?
#feedback I think you might be missing never in your list of indicators.
#feedback
Is this correct?
Negate Sufficient: Negate both
Negate Necessary: Negate one
So, is there such a thing as a true necessary condition, or is this exercise mainly about understanding the prompt, since we can turn any condition into a necessary one just by negating it when these specific indicators are present?
#feedback
I've done a whole course and watched so many videos, and this is the first one that's truly made sense to me thank you.
I found the other methods tended to work 90% of the time, but became tricky when the language got more confusing.
I at first learned with Power scores "unless" rule which is ultimately the same thing( when you see unless, put the word following unless as necessary and then negate the sufficient.) The problem with this rule is it would really trip me up when group 3 and group 4 rules got combined. This makes a lot more sense relationship wise and it clicked seeing the relationship between the normal and the contrapositive.