Does anyone understand what he means when he says that /eligible -> /IW or /501C doesn’t mean that it has to be one and not the other? Or also when he says that it could mean “neither”. I think I need that a bit more clarified. Pls help lol!
Can someone explain why the virus and the 1 week after, are togther the sufficient clause? I thought the 1 week would be a necessary condition along with the antibody.
@JuliannaCalder the appositive "after a week" is a modifier of the noun anyone infected by the virus. With those two conditions met, infected and a week, then we get antibodies.
Think of a similar situation: a tennis player. Anyone participating in Wimbledon, after reaching the semifinals, will receive prize money. The two conditions we have to meet to "receive prize money" is both "Participating in Wimbledon and reach semi-finals." I usually like to change the appositive to "and". So rather than the commas, I just think to myself: If you're participating in Wimbledon and reach the semifinals, then you will receive prize money.
Participate + Semifinals-> Prize Money.
This is the same structure as the one you are asking about. Let me know if this helps
i already know my biggest weakness is gonna be confusing sufficiency for necessity when there are no indicators... does anyone have any advice or ways i can do more lessons on this?
@NoraElkhyati Something that helps me is grouping the concepts into the subset and superset (sufficient and necessary, respectively). For instance, for question 2, I identified trees as a subset to the supersets perennial plants and plants with stems; trees fit these two criterion, but there are other perennial plants and plants with elongated stems that are not trees, thus making trees the subset (sufficient) and per./e-stem the superset (necessary). This would therefore translate to, with the use of de Morgan's for the contrapositive:
T -> per. and e-stem; contrapositive of /per. or /e-stem -> /T.
If you approach the sentence, "All cats are mammals and are adorable," you could identify that mammals and adorable are two supersets; there are other things that fit into these categories other than cats. However, cats also fit into these two as a subset. Therefore, cat must be the sufficient condition and mammals and adorable must be the necessary conditions. This comes out to:
C -> M and A; contrapositive of /M or /A -> /C.
I hope this makes sense and is of any assistance to you guys! Best of luck on the LSAT, you got this!!
@NoraElkhyati always thing about set and super set. also helps to think that sufficient (set) guarantees something to happen. But the necessary condition(super set) does not guarantee. example if it is raining, then the ground is wet.
you see the rains is sufficient and guarantee that the ground is wet but the ground being wet is not guarantee that it is raining. Could be wet for any other reason.
For #6, I also had pet adoption center in my sufficient condition. But in the logic they just have website and 501(c)3 non-profit. That doesn't make sense to me because it could be an organization to help veterans.. if it has just a website and it's 501(c)3 that doesn't mean it can be eligible for the Mittens Grant. I think pet adoption center needs to be in the sufficient condition.
@Laylay Hi Laylay, you would be correct if the question stated "Only pet adoption centres with..." rather then what we got which was "If a pet adoption centre", meaning the stimuli has informed us what it is, so we must operate under the understanding that this information is static.
Or in other words, it seems you may be more focused on the modifiers.
So if you are infected with the virus and if one week has passed then you produce antibodies. So both having virus and after 1 week means it’s necessary to have antibodies
Contrapositive is= if you don’t produce antibodies, then you either don’t have the virus or it hasn’t been more than a week?
I think I’m confusing this because now the contrapositive to me sounds like it’s only necessary to have a virus (no matter how long) or a virus for a week or more long to develop the antibodies.
I guess my question is how do I interpret the contrapositive and connect back to original without changing the meaning the “or” makes me think now only 1 is necessary but in the first it’s like antibodies are necessary when you have both virus after a week. Hope I’m explaining my thoughts right.
#2 definitely tripped me up, I didn't think of "with" as a conjunction and thought that "perennial plants with elongated stems" was all one big condition.
@AmayaUkandu totally feel you. the first time i did this i didn't even realize that with could have the same meaning. i took a couple days off and came back to this exercise after reading my notes and it was automatically clear to me. i think it will just be more obvious with time and practice.
I feel like for #5 part of the sufficient condition should be being in the US. First, it is specified; second, common sense supports that some countries have different ages. I did 21 & US -> A, which basically worked, but I was still surprised to see the explanation say "or older" was the conjunction.
For #6, is pet adoption center not included in the sufficient condition? There could exist a nonprofit with an interactive website that is not a pet adoption center. Would not being an adoption center disqualify it from the Mittens Foundation Grant?
For number 5, "Anyone who is twenty-one years old or older is legally allowed to purchase alcohol in the United States.", isn't being 21 and 21+ both sufficient and necessary for purchasing alcohol in the US? I'm a little confused on this one!
@TaylorHedrick Think about the meaning of the language itself. (You're right based on real life knowledge, but we're just trying to interpret the given statements.)
Someone please help me understand for the better. For Question 4, my answer was " Safety of passengers and other people --> must be programmed " with the contrapositive being " /must be programmed --> /safety of passengers or /other people ".
I completely focused on "must" as a necessary indicator and thought that "programmed" was the necessary conclusion.
I initially thought "programmed" should be the sufficient condition, and the rest being the necessary condition but the necessary indicator really threw me off. I didn't know "must" could refer to the whole clause right after it. Am I just dumb??
@MatthewGhebredingle Must is a group 2 indicator, meaning it's the necessary condition. I remember sufficient and necessary by saying "Super necessary" and the SUPERset being the necessary condition on the right side. Anything to the right of a group two indicator like must goes on the right, so -> safety of passengers and other people. Then the only other thing mentioned is the self-driving cars so that's the sufficient condition.
Self driving car -> programmed to ensure safety of passenger and other people.
The "only" in this problem could have thrown me off but good thing I saw "must" first!
@MatthewGhebredingle Give yourself some grace. You are not dumb, you are learning.
When I read the sentence and also watched the video - explanation says "must" is the necessary indicator word - I actually felt that "ensure" in the context as a whole was a bigger/better Group 2 indicator word and went with that. The split between the two concepts into suff. / necessary then felt more natural for me. Ex. All self driving cars must be programmed. WHY? To ensure these 2 things, etc. But it did take looking at the big picture get that diagram.
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.
237 comments
Does anyone understand what he means when he says that /eligible -> /IW or /501C doesn’t mean that it has to be one and not the other? Or also when he says that it could mean “neither”. I think I need that a bit more clarified. Pls help lol!
@Valleygirlala I think he means that if an adoption center is not eligible, it could mean any one of three things:
it does not have an interactive website (/IW)
it is not a 501c (/501c)
it does not have either a website and is not a 501c (/IW and /501c)
He is merely reminding us that option 3 is also possible, which is that an ineligible adoption center could lack both a website and not be a 501c.
#3 was initially not intuitive whatsoever to me
Is it necessary to do the contrapositive each time?
@CaleighFreeman The exercise suggests you do for sake of practice. You don't need to do it on test day.
I really like the explanation of question #6
Can someone explain why the virus and the 1 week after, are togther the sufficient clause? I thought the 1 week would be a necessary condition along with the antibody.
@JuliannaCalder the appositive "after a week" is a modifier of the noun anyone infected by the virus. With those two conditions met, infected and a week, then we get antibodies.
Think of a similar situation: a tennis player. Anyone participating in Wimbledon, after reaching the semifinals, will receive prize money. The two conditions we have to meet to "receive prize money" is both "Participating in Wimbledon and reach semi-finals." I usually like to change the appositive to "and". So rather than the commas, I just think to myself: If you're participating in Wimbledon and reach the semifinals, then you will receive prize money.
Participate + Semifinals-> Prize Money.
This is the same structure as the one you are asking about. Let me know if this helps
@joegav1 Thank you so much! That makes a lot more sense. I appreciate it!!!
back here after 8 months of studying.... this stuff is important I promise!!
i already know my biggest weakness is gonna be confusing sufficiency for necessity when there are no indicators... does anyone have any advice or ways i can do more lessons on this?
@NoraElkhyati This is also my biggest problem, it is confusing sufficiency for necessity
@NoraElkhyati Something that helps me is grouping the concepts into the subset and superset (sufficient and necessary, respectively). For instance, for question 2, I identified trees as a subset to the supersets perennial plants and plants with stems; trees fit these two criterion, but there are other perennial plants and plants with elongated stems that are not trees, thus making trees the subset (sufficient) and per./e-stem the superset (necessary). This would therefore translate to, with the use of de Morgan's for the contrapositive:
T -> per. and e-stem; contrapositive of /per. or /e-stem -> /T.
If you approach the sentence, "All cats are mammals and are adorable," you could identify that mammals and adorable are two supersets; there are other things that fit into these categories other than cats. However, cats also fit into these two as a subset. Therefore, cat must be the sufficient condition and mammals and adorable must be the necessary conditions. This comes out to:
C -> M and A; contrapositive of /M or /A -> /C.
I hope this makes sense and is of any assistance to you guys! Best of luck on the LSAT, you got this!!
@NoraElkhyati always thing about set and super set. also helps to think that sufficient (set) guarantees something to happen. But the necessary condition(super set) does not guarantee. example if it is raining, then the ground is wet.
you see the rains is sufficient and guarantee that the ground is wet but the ground being wet is not guarantee that it is raining. Could be wet for any other reason.
Hope this help
For number 8, if we don’t diagram the last sentence what kind of answer choices would we be looking for as an example?
For #6, I also had pet adoption center in my sufficient condition. But in the logic they just have website and 501(c)3 non-profit. That doesn't make sense to me because it could be an organization to help veterans.. if it has just a website and it's 501(c)3 that doesn't mean it can be eligible for the Mittens Grant. I think pet adoption center needs to be in the sufficient condition.
What I had:
pet adoption and website and 501(c)3 -> eligible
@Laylay Hi Laylay, you would be correct if the question stated "Only pet adoption centres with..." rather then what we got which was "If a pet adoption centre", meaning the stimuli has informed us what it is, so we must operate under the understanding that this information is static.
Or in other words, it seems you may be more focused on the modifiers.
Are these the only practice problems for this?
I def fell for the red herring bs.
is the voice different?
5/5, im on a roll
Just to clarify for question 3:
So if you are infected with the virus and if one week has passed then you produce antibodies. So both having virus and after 1 week means it’s necessary to have antibodies
Contrapositive is= if you don’t produce antibodies, then you either don’t have the virus or it hasn’t been more than a week?
I think I’m confusing this because now the contrapositive to me sounds like it’s only necessary to have a virus (no matter how long) or a virus for a week or more long to develop the antibodies.
I guess my question is how do I interpret the contrapositive and connect back to original without changing the meaning the “or” makes me think now only 1 is necessary but in the first it’s like antibodies are necessary when you have both virus after a week. Hope I’m explaining my thoughts right.
I actually finally understood these and correctly answered them all. Yay!
For number 1, if "only if" is a group 2 indicator why isn't ben-other and intent not necessary conditions?
@lawyergirl27 they are necessary conditions! that's why they appear on the right side of the arrow.
"action morally good (SUFFICIENT)--> benefits another (NECESSARY) & performed with intention (NECESSARY)"
@lawyergirl27 thank you! I realized after I made the comment.
#2 definitely tripped me up, I didn't think of "with" as a conjunction and thought that "perennial plants with elongated stems" was all one big condition.
Maybe I need to look up what conjunctions are lol
@AmayaUkandu totally feel you. the first time i did this i didn't even realize that with could have the same meaning. i took a couple days off and came back to this exercise after reading my notes and it was automatically clear to me. i think it will just be more obvious with time and practice.
I don't know why but for question 6 I did pet adoption center instead of website ugh
I got tricked on question 6
Woo! This makes more sense! lol
I feel like for #5 part of the sufficient condition should be being in the US. First, it is specified; second, common sense supports that some countries have different ages. I did 21 & US -> A, which basically worked, but I was still surprised to see the explanation say "or older" was the conjunction.
First 100%!
I am peppering in random LSAT drills and not really noticing my score increasing yet. I hope that's normal..
For #6, is pet adoption center not included in the sufficient condition? There could exist a nonprofit with an interactive website that is not a pet adoption center. Would not being an adoption center disqualify it from the Mittens Foundation Grant?
For number 5, "Anyone who is twenty-one years old or older is legally allowed to purchase alcohol in the United States.", isn't being 21 and 21+ both sufficient and necessary for purchasing alcohol in the US? I'm a little confused on this one!
@TaylorHedrick Think about the meaning of the language itself. (You're right based on real life knowledge, but we're just trying to interpret the given statements.)
Someone please help me understand for the better. For Question 4, my answer was " Safety of passengers and other people --> must be programmed " with the contrapositive being " /must be programmed --> /safety of passengers or /other people ".
I completely focused on "must" as a necessary indicator and thought that "programmed" was the necessary conclusion.
I initially thought "programmed" should be the sufficient condition, and the rest being the necessary condition but the necessary indicator really threw me off. I didn't know "must" could refer to the whole clause right after it. Am I just dumb??
@MatthewGhebredingle Must is a group 2 indicator, meaning it's the necessary condition. I remember sufficient and necessary by saying "Super necessary" and the SUPERset being the necessary condition on the right side. Anything to the right of a group two indicator like must goes on the right, so -> safety of passengers and other people. Then the only other thing mentioned is the self-driving cars so that's the sufficient condition.
Self driving car -> programmed to ensure safety of passenger and other people.
The "only" in this problem could have thrown me off but good thing I saw "must" first!
@MatthewGhebredingle Give yourself some grace. You are not dumb, you are learning.
When I read the sentence and also watched the video - explanation says "must" is the necessary indicator word - I actually felt that "ensure" in the context as a whole was a bigger/better Group 2 indicator word and went with that. The split between the two concepts into suff. / necessary then felt more natural for me. Ex. All self driving cars must be programmed. WHY? To ensure these 2 things, etc. But it did take looking at the big picture get that diagram.