With the example of the students that can read, can it also be that the main set is the students in the class and the subset being the number of students who can read?
Can a "most" claim be theoretically bi-directional if the size of both groups is the same?
For instance, say that there are an equal number of dogs and pets. We combine the circles in such a way that they both overlap to account for more than half of the circle. In that instance, would we just do d <-m-> p?
Good example of why the most arrow can only be one directional
The statement "Most A’s are B’s" is not identical to "Most B’s are A’s" because "most" implies a majority (more than 50%) but does not guarantee symmetry.
Suppose there are 100 A's and 200 B's. If most A's are B's, this means more than 50 of the A's are also B's (say, 80 A's are B's). However, that does not mean that most B's are A's. If there are 200 B's and only 80 of them are A's, then only 40% of B's are A's, which is not "most."
Contrast this to "some" where the arrow can be bidirectional
The statement "Some A's are B's" is identical to "Some B's are A's" because "some" means at least one element belongs to both sets. Unlike "most," "some" does not imply a majority or proportion—just existence.
Why Are They Identical?
If at least one A is a B, that means there exists an element in the intersection of sets A and B.
This automatically means that at least one B is an A, because the same element belongs to both sets.
I'm a bit confused. First these statements we're looking at are conclusions. right? We're making evaluations on the "truth" of these conclusions with these arrows or is it the validity?
Regarding validity, wouldn't "most students who can read are in Mrs. Stoops' class" still be valid? Because we're imaging a separate world where it's true.
What if the most is in the necessary condition? Like with the environmental goals example from the last lesson. Meet env goal only if most cars are electric. How would that be diagrammed to account for that fact that it's not read as if most goals are met then cars are electric. MG -m-> CE ?
0
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!
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.
28 comments
"so many other pets: cats, rabbits, hamsters, fish, reptiles, etc." This is bird erasure
I guessed what the element of most would look like before it revealed and yelled in excitement when I was proven right.
Can I not make the domain "Ms Stoops' Class" and then that would make the arrow multi-directional?
With the example of the students that can read, can it also be that the main set is the students in the class and the subset being the number of students who can read?
Can a "most" claim be theoretically bi-directional if the size of both groups is the same?
For instance, say that there are an equal number of dogs and pets. We combine the circles in such a way that they both overlap to account for more than half of the circle. In that instance, would we just do d <-m-> p?
Can i say Most cats are pets is equal to few pets are cats?
Good example of why the most arrow can only be one directional
The statement "Most A’s are B’s" is not identical to "Most B’s are A’s" because "most" implies a majority (more than 50%) but does not guarantee symmetry.
Suppose there are 100 A's and 200 B's. If most A's are B's, this means more than 50 of the A's are also B's (say, 80 A's are B's). However, that does not mean that most B's are A's. If there are 200 B's and only 80 of them are A's, then only 40% of B's are A's, which is not "most."
Contrast this to "some" where the arrow can be bidirectional
The statement "Some A's are B's" is identical to "Some B's are A's" because "some" means at least one element belongs to both sets. Unlike "most," "some" does not imply a majority or proportion—just existence.
Why Are They Identical?
If at least one A is a B, that means there exists an element in the intersection of sets A and B.
This automatically means that at least one B is an A, because the same element belongs to both sets.
seeing this all come together when solving is mind blowing lol
how do you determine what set goes on which side of the arrow
Stoops's should be Stoops'
I know this maybe a stupid question, but isn't Lawgic produced by 7Sagee, not a universal curriculum right?
#help
I'm a bit confused. First these statements we're looking at are conclusions. right? We're making evaluations on the "truth" of these conclusions with these arrows or is it the validity?
Regarding validity, wouldn't "most students who can read are in Mrs. Stoops' class" still be valid? Because we're imaging a separate world where it's true.
would the contrapositive of most be some?
student ----m ----> readers
readers students?
What if the most is in the necessary condition? Like with the environmental goals example from the last lesson. Meet env goal only if most cars are electric. How would that be diagrammed to account for that fact that it's not read as if most goals are met then cars are electric. MG -m-> CE ?