Quick tip for anyone struggling to find the sufficient and necessary conditions in examples that begin with an indicator (#2, 3, 5). Rewrite the question with the word "cannot."
Ex: No birds are trees.---> Birds CANNOT be trees. Then, the lawgic translation is B--> /T.
It works with the other examples as well: No holiday falls within the month of August= Holidays CANNOT fall within the month of August. (H--> /A) OR
August CANNOT have holidays. (A--> /H).
This worked much more intuitively for me than just figuring it out by myself. I guess you could also say that the negated necessary term will always be the second premise as well...Whatever works lol!
The indicator list is just a guide, they are not all inclusive, we may need to see if the indicator present in the clause is similar in meaning, to the words in our list. Group 4 has no, none, not both, cannot, (Never), kind of fits right in.
#feedback I think the ability to highlight in quiz text boxes would be super helpful (e.g. highlighting the subject in one color and the predicate in a different color, etc.)
I would like to share an additional quick-and-dirty rule/trick that will be helpful.
"NOT...UNLESS":
Let's say you have "Not" and later in the sentence have "Unless".
Like this: Not A, Unless B." Rather than going through the rules, just remember that "Not... Unless" is the same as A --> B. So, "Not A, Unless B" = "A--->B." You can replace "Unless" with any other Group 3 indicator and the rule works the same way.
"UNLESS...NOT":
There is a similar procedure if the order is flipped. If you have "Unless A, Not B" that becomes /A--->/B. Or the contrapositive, B--->A. You can again replace "Unless" with "Without" or any other Group 3 indicator and the procedure is the same.
(Maybe already stated, but I don't have time to read all these comments): "never" is not included as one of the common [negate, necessity] indicators but multiple examples use "never" in this exercise. Might be worth adding "never" to the list.
He did point out for Group 4 and other groups that the word lists are both “over inclusive” meaning they might also be used in other parts of “Lawgic”, and “under inclusive” meaning the lists are not all inclusive. There might be other words that count, depending on context.
So think of them as fuzzy lists, not exact lists.
I am on day three of my plan, and this is a lot to absorb. So you will probably be able to point out something I missed later on!
I don't think I like translating things from English to Lawgic...Is that fine? Most of these concepts, at least in the examples, I understand in their original English form...But I am worried if I do not take this seriously it will hurt me on the test! Any advice?
I say to try to learn it now. I felt the same way when I went through the lessons, and it wasn't until after I started on the actual logical reasoning section did I realize why there was so many lessons on translating. It's okay if you don't know it perfectly now, but it will definititely be to your benefit to be able to translate well. It'll get easier as you go through the curriculum and you see its relevance. To give some reference, I started a bit ago and am now returning to these lessons to solidify my understanding of conditional logic because it's that important. I hope this helps!
At the very least, I always try to translate the sentences into the "if/then" form w/ contrapositives if applicable. The Lawgic seems to be a middle step bridging this translation if you face more complicated sentences.
Lawgic is crucial in later lessons. I skipped this module and the idea of Lawgic thinking the same thing, it is not important. However, just like everything on this test, it does end up being important in saving time but it just takes practice and drilling to get it down! You got this, just stick with it!
#feedback It would be helpful to have written answers for these questions so that we can skim them to see if we need additional support before watching the entire video.
For 2.1: None of the flowers in the garden bloom in winter.
Wouldn't the if/then be:
If/Then: If it is a flower in the garden, then it does not bloom in winter. If it is blooming in winter, then it is not a flower in the garden.
Because "bloom in winter" is the predicate. But your answer (If the flowers in the garden are blooming, then it is not winter. If it is winter, then the flowers in the garden are not blooming.) treats "it is winter" as a predicate.
This is a great breakdown! I want to acknowledge that both ways are accurate ways of understanding the sentence. There's no one "right" way for some more complicated sentences. (Though, there can be wrong ways.)
272 comments
I see the vision
Quick tip for anyone struggling to find the sufficient and necessary conditions in examples that begin with an indicator (#2, 3, 5). Rewrite the question with the word "cannot."
Ex: No birds are trees.---> Birds CANNOT be trees. Then, the lawgic translation is B--> /T.
It works with the other examples as well: No holiday falls within the month of August= Holidays CANNOT fall within the month of August. (H--> /A) OR
August CANNOT have holidays. (A--> /H).
This worked much more intuitively for me than just figuring it out by myself. I guess you could also say that the negated necessary term will always be the second premise as well...Whatever works lol!
@g.carlyle04 this helped me, thank you so much for this!
this was suspiciously easy
These feel more intuitive than the previous group
It will all be worth it guys!
Never isnt listed as a group 4 indicator ..
The indicator list is just a guide, they are not all inclusive, we may need to see if the indicator present in the clause is similar in meaning, to the words in our list. Group 4 has no, none, not both, cannot, (Never), kind of fits right in.
@betsey.carroll Add it to your list as you go!
A step implied but left out is to ignore the "No/None/Not both/Cannot/etc." indicator when negating and writing the statements.
@owenshi2012 Thank you for this...seriously.
@owenshi2012 I asked this exact question in a different lesson. Thanks so much.
@owenshi2012 I think this is understood through the fact that they are considered "indicators," and therefore not part of the "ideas" themselves
@owenshi2012 lol no seriously, like i'm waiting for the other shoe to drop
5/5!!!
Not trying to get overconfident but this is making a lot of sense. Hopefully this trend continues when I get to full questions!
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
So is Never officially part of group 4??
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
#feedback I think the ability to highlight in quiz text boxes would be super helpful (e.g. highlighting the subject in one color and the predicate in a different color, etc.)
I whole-heartedly agree!!!!
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
5/5 at last
5/5!!! YAY!
This one feels so much more intuitive than the group 3 indicators.
For whatever reason, I have been writing the contrapositive first when turning them into logic. I wonder why.
I would like to share an additional quick-and-dirty rule/trick that will be helpful.
"NOT...UNLESS":
Let's say you have "Not" and later in the sentence have "Unless".
Like this: Not A, Unless B." Rather than going through the rules, just remember that "Not... Unless" is the same as A --> B. So, "Not A, Unless B" = "A--->B." You can replace "Unless" with any other Group 3 indicator and the rule works the same way.
"UNLESS...NOT":
There is a similar procedure if the order is flipped. If you have "Unless A, Not B" that becomes /A--->/B. Or the contrapositive, B--->A. You can again replace "Unless" with "Without" or any other Group 3 indicator and the procedure is the same.
(Maybe already stated, but I don't have time to read all these comments): "never" is not included as one of the common [negate, necessity] indicators but multiple examples use "never" in this exercise. Might be worth adding "never" to the list.
@JennyFrank this why i came straight to the comments because "never" was not listed so i was confused as to where that came from
He did point out for Group 4 and other groups that the word lists are both “over inclusive” meaning they might also be used in other parts of “Lawgic”, and “under inclusive” meaning the lists are not all inclusive. There might be other words that count, depending on context.
So think of them as fuzzy lists, not exact lists.
I am on day three of my plan, and this is a lot to absorb. So you will probably be able to point out something I missed later on!
This lesson made all the other indicator lessons make sense. Soooo glad I finally got it.
@rjon27 I 100% agree, sometimes a puzzle doesn't make sense until more pieces are added
I don't think I like translating things from English to Lawgic...Is that fine? Most of these concepts, at least in the examples, I understand in their original English form...But I am worried if I do not take this seriously it will hurt me on the test! Any advice?
This is exactly how I'm feeling. The whole translating thing has brought me much more confusion.
I say to try to learn it now. I felt the same way when I went through the lessons, and it wasn't until after I started on the actual logical reasoning section did I realize why there was so many lessons on translating. It's okay if you don't know it perfectly now, but it will definititely be to your benefit to be able to translate well. It'll get easier as you go through the curriculum and you see its relevance. To give some reference, I started a bit ago and am now returning to these lessons to solidify my understanding of conditional logic because it's that important. I hope this helps!
At the very least, I always try to translate the sentences into the "if/then" form w/ contrapositives if applicable. The Lawgic seems to be a middle step bridging this translation if you face more complicated sentences.
Would love to know the answer to this question! Is working with the original English form going to be a problem in the future?
Lawgic is crucial in later lessons. I skipped this module and the idea of Lawgic thinking the same thing, it is not important. However, just like everything on this test, it does end up being important in saving time but it just takes practice and drilling to get it down! You got this, just stick with it!
would love to know the answer to this question as well!
These activities are becoming slightly fun!
#feedback It would be helpful to have written answers for these questions so that we can skim them to see if we need additional support before watching the entire video.
For 2.1: None of the flowers in the garden bloom in winter.
Wouldn't the if/then be:
If/Then: If it is a flower in the garden, then it does not bloom in winter. If it is blooming in winter, then it is not a flower in the garden.
Because "bloom in winter" is the predicate. But your answer (If the flowers in the garden are blooming, then it is not winter. If it is winter, then the flowers in the garden are not blooming.) treats "it is winter" as a predicate.
#help (Added by Admin)
#help !
I had a similar thought process! Does anyone have insight on why the wording would be different? Here's my translation:
None (subject) (predicate)
subject = (none of the) flowers (in the garden)
predicate = bloom (in winter)
flowers -> /bloom (if it is a flower in the garden, then it is not blooming in winter)
bloom -> /flowers (if it blooming in winter, then it is not a flower in the garden)
#help
"In the garden" is just modifying flowers.
This is a great breakdown! I want to acknowledge that both ways are accurate ways of understanding the sentence. There's no one "right" way for some more complicated sentences. (Though, there can be wrong ways.)
#help !
I think both ways are true. But I'd like to see the answer so...
#help
#help
"never" was not listed in the group 4 list in the lesson. So I got tripped up when it appeared in practice
@Marlowsteed I think the easiest way to identify Group 4 is any word that is a straight up "no" or a word that indicates that something cannot happen.