#feedback when lawgic isn't used in the answers can we explicitly be given the reasoning as for why not? not super clear why some answers are so thorough while others go almost entirely unexplained.
For the few clause, doesn't some are, most are not also allow for it to be kitten ←s→ home-children? Since in the lesson it says that few can be interpreted as some or most. I feel like this question could be best answered with most however some still feels like an acceptable answer to me. Is there anything that disproves that?
The video says that fewer than half can imply 0 since 0 is technically fewer than half. That is not the same thing as saying some because some means one or more of the kittens HAS to go to a home without children.
So, if 20 Kittens went to homes without children, and 0 kittens went to homes with children; it would still be TRUE to say that Fewer than Half went to homes with children. It would be WRONG to say that some went to Homes with Children because it is outside of the lower boundary of some.
Still, I would not recommend going to your in-laws house and eating all of your father-in-law's dinner and then trying to tell him you ate less than half of it. This is LSAT lawgic, not people logic.
@Reiii23 I think that the interpretation of "some" is technically correct, I just think for this question "most not" is the best way to interpret it. I also put what you had. Like in the lesson on Few it said it could be either, but the "most not" was the "key inference"
@Reiii23 "few" and "fewer than half" are two different things. "Few" means some but not most. "Some" means at least one and "most" means more than half. "fewer than half" may mean none/zero which is not the same as "some".
It's safer to infer "few" as "not most" than it is to infer "few" as "some".
I and many others in the comments have the same question about #2 - why isn't several interpreted as some?
I have noticed a lot of questions left in the comments across multiple lessons have gone unanswered for many months. Because of this sometimes I feel like it's not worth leaving a question. Is there anyone that actively reads/and answers comments? Thanks.
"If you want, you can translate "several" to "some" for the purpose of a lawgic translation. However, just remember that "some" means "at least one," and so can encompass just one. But, "several" cannot encompass just one; it requires more than one."
Not sure if this was there when you asked your questions but in other words, some can mean just one, whereas several implies there is more than one - so they cannot be interchangeable
@monmon "Many" means a lot, but doesn't necessary mean over half. "I study many days each year." That doesn't mean I study over 50% of the days in a year.
But "usually" does mean over 50%. "On Fridays, I usually leave early from work." That means that on over 50% of Fridays, I leave early from work. It wouldn't make sense if I left work early on Friday less than 50% of the time -- in what sense can I say "usually" if it's not the thing that happens most of the time?
(It might be that informally we sometimes use "usually" in a way that doesn't mean over 50%. That might be why it sounds confusing to you.)
For question 5, I'm confused as to why Fewer than half doesn't imply some of the kittens adopted yesterday went to homes with children. I understand why most is not true, but I'd think fewer than half also translates to some.
Lawgic feels very unnecessary for these. If that works for you, and thats what you need to do, go for it. But if you are understanding all of these quantifiers without them, then I think you can skip them. Most ( ;) )of us probably can.
The last one was difficult but it made sense. P.S. if you are reading this just know that it is a 4th of july weekend & I am still here & so are you! WE GOT THIS
For number 5, I said kittens adopted ←s→ homes with children. Is that the same as kitten —m→ /home-children? On the module for "Few" it said Few meant "some are" and "most are not". x←s→y. and x—m→ /y
LSAT logic question for you all - if someone 'usually exercises on Monday,' does that definitely mean they exercise on Monday more than 50% of the time?
What if they work out 100 times total: 49 workouts on Monday, and the other 51 workouts split evenly across Tue-Sun (about 8-9 each day). Monday is still their most common workout day, but it's not actually the majority of their workouts.
Would you still say they 'usually exercise on Monday' in this case? Trying to figure out how strict the LSAT is with 'usually' = majority vs. just most frequent.
@pb_24 do you think it would be reasonable to say they usually work out on "not" monday? Which then clumps all other days in this category. But that is a great question
For #1 why wouldn't it be cafes instead of city? To me it doesn't make sense that you would be saying that some city serves HPO. or at least I could understand it being CC, for city cafes?
Can 5 also be translated to K <-some-> /Chil? We know its most, but this encapsulates "some" as well, right? Or are we to focus on taking the Lawgic as far as it can go, and that being the singular answer?
Because some is more ambiguous than "Fewer than." Fewer than half gives you restrictions on the number. Some could be more than half or fewer than half.
Referencing #5, is it safe to assume if "than half" or a phrase representing half is used, then we'll use most in some way? I know it might not always be this way, but just trying to get this straight in my head.
for question #4 the quantifier usually, are there other words that could imply other quantifiers? Maybe I missed the lessons discussing how usually means most, but that threw me for a loop. Anyone else?
242 comments
"Usually" got me !!
@PranjalChaudhary yup now i know thats a most inidicator
#feedback when lawgic isn't used in the answers can we explicitly be given the reasoning as for why not? not super clear why some answers are so thorough while others go almost entirely unexplained.
Q5 tricky. I immediately interpreted fewer than half as 'some'. Rookie mistake...
i jumped to that too, BUT then realized that we could implement the few clause here (transforming the quantifier of few into some are = most are not).
For the few clause, doesn't some are, most are not also allow for it to be kitten ←s→ home-children? Since in the lesson it says that few can be interpreted as some or most. I feel like this question could be best answered with most however some still feels like an acceptable answer to me. Is there anything that disproves that?
I had the same question!
I did the same thing. This is what I figured out:
The video says that fewer than half can imply 0 since 0 is technically fewer than half. That is not the same thing as saying some because some means one or more of the kittens HAS to go to a home without children.
So, if 20 Kittens went to homes without children, and 0 kittens went to homes with children; it would still be TRUE to say that Fewer than Half went to homes with children. It would be WRONG to say that some went to Homes with Children because it is outside of the lower boundary of some.
Still, I would not recommend going to your in-laws house and eating all of your father-in-law's dinner and then trying to tell him you ate less than half of it. This is LSAT lawgic, not people logic.
@stratford.douglas thanks for this!
For question 5, wouldn't
"kittens <-s-> homes with children" also work?
I get now how it's kitten -m-> /home children but I thought that "few" can also mean some because it is less than half.
@Reiii23 Few doesn't necessarily mean some because some has a lower boundary of 1, but can also go up to most, or even all.
@Reiii23 I think that the interpretation of "some" is technically correct, I just think for this question "most not" is the best way to interpret it. I also put what you had. Like in the lesson on Few it said it could be either, but the "most not" was the "key inference"
@Reiii23 "few" and "fewer than half" are two different things. "Few" means some but not most. "Some" means at least one and "most" means more than half. "fewer than half" may mean none/zero which is not the same as "some".
It's safer to infer "few" as "not most" than it is to infer "few" as "some".
I and many others in the comments have the same question about #2 - why isn't several interpreted as some?
I have noticed a lot of questions left in the comments across multiple lessons have gone unanswered for many months. Because of this sometimes I feel like it's not worth leaving a question. Is there anyone that actively reads/and answers comments? Thanks.
#help #feedback
"If you want, you can translate "several" to "some" for the purpose of a lawgic translation. However, just remember that "some" means "at least one," and so can encompass just one. But, "several" cannot encompass just one; it requires more than one."
Not sure if this was there when you asked your questions but in other words, some can mean just one, whereas several implies there is more than one - so they cannot be interchangeable
whoah whoah whoah. Why are we okay to assume “Usually” = “Most”? Especially after drilling into us that “Many” absolutely does not equal “Most”?
Prof. Sprout's Mandrake inspections are usually conducted on Mondays.
I read “Usually” as “Many times” or “Sometimes” because I don’t see how we can infer that this inspection is happening 51% of Mondays.
Sprout <-s-> Monday
So if today is Monday, there is a chance that Sprout’s class is happening. And if Sprout’s class is happening, today is probably Monday.
I’m really not clear on Usually becoming Most.
@monmon "Many" means a lot, but doesn't necessary mean over half. "I study many days each year." That doesn't mean I study over 50% of the days in a year.
But "usually" does mean over 50%. "On Fridays, I usually leave early from work." That means that on over 50% of Fridays, I leave early from work. It wouldn't make sense if I left work early on Friday less than 50% of the time -- in what sense can I say "usually" if it's not the thing that happens most of the time?
(It might be that informally we sometimes use "usually" in a way that doesn't mean over 50%. That might be why it sounds confusing to you.)
@Kevin_Lin huh! Yeah fair enough — thanks for taking the time!
for Q11 can it also be K some Home with children
For question 5, I'm confused as to why Fewer than half doesn't imply some of the kittens adopted yesterday went to homes with children. I understand why most is not true, but I'd think fewer than half also translates to some.
@NikhitaMinas 0 kittens =< half of kittens therefore some is not a sure thing
@danjames Thank you! Visually seeing that equation somehow instantly made sense!
Lawgic feels very unnecessary for these. If that works for you, and thats what you need to do, go for it. But if you are understanding all of these quantifiers without them, then I think you can skip them. Most ( ;) )of us probably can.
#help
For questions 11, can we also notate it as the following?
kitten ←s→ home-children
Also curious, since you can interpret it as "few," which has AND -m-> /
No, because "some" could mean any amount between one up to all of the kittens.
same q here!
But in the "few" lesson, we learned that :
So when you encounter the claim "Few X are Y," you'll translate it into two claims:
1. Some X are Y
2. Most X are not Y
I interpreted this as, two phrases together make the whole meaning come together. i.e: It's some but not more than half.
The last one was difficult but it made sense. P.S. if you are reading this just know that it is a 4th of july weekend & I am still here & so are you! WE GOT THIS
for question 5, can it be interpretated as some kittens adopted went to homes? or is it because the upper limit is fewer than half, it's a most not?
@JennyHong I had the same question!
For question 5. I understood by fewer than half as maybe 49%.
So it cannot be some or many because the can include all depending on the contest.
So Few than half gives us a lowe than 50% range maybe?
For number 5, I said kittens adopted ←s→ homes with children. Is that the same as kitten —m→ /home-children? On the module for "Few" it said Few meant "some are" and "most are not". x←s→y. and x—m→ /y
@Chavi625 i did the same!
Questions regarding #4:
LSAT logic question for you all - if someone 'usually exercises on Monday,' does that definitely mean they exercise on Monday more than 50% of the time?
What if they work out 100 times total: 49 workouts on Monday, and the other 51 workouts split evenly across Tue-Sun (about 8-9 each day). Monday is still their most common workout day, but it's not actually the majority of their workouts.
Would you still say they 'usually exercise on Monday' in this case? Trying to figure out how strict the LSAT is with 'usually' = majority vs. just most frequent.
@pb_24 do you think it would be reasonable to say they usually work out on "not" monday? Which then clumps all other days in this category. But that is a great question
@pb_24 came here to ask similar.... i would not assume that "usually" necessarily indicates "most"
Can you also kick it up a domain here? E.g. Some cafes in the city serve hand poured single origin coffee.
Domain in the city
Rule: cafe <-s-> HPSOC
For #1 why wouldn't it be cafes instead of city? To me it doesn't make sense that you would be saying that some city serves HPO. or at least I could understand it being CC, for city cafes?
@gianananpolitano123 It's just how he's choosing to formulate for the example. Logically, there's nothing wrong with CC.
why isnt several considered some? #help (Added by admin)
#help same, can someone please explain?
same Q given that some is at least one and the explanation says "more than one or two"
Same
#help had the same question
If question 5 just said "Few kittens adopted yesterday went to homes with children," would it be correct then to diagram as:
Kittens adopted yesterday <-some-> homes with children
and
Kittens adopted yesterday -most-> /homes with children
@jlj22 this is also what i did as well! i think it could work logically
Can 5 also be translated to K <-some-> /Chil? We know its most, but this encapsulates "some" as well, right? Or are we to focus on taking the Lawgic as far as it can go, and that being the singular answer?
That's implied by the statement. But it doesn't capture the full meaning of "fewer than half."
@Kevin_Lin Got it, so with Lawgic we want to push it to be as specific as possible.
for #5 why wouldnt some work?
I had the same question... I put some for the translation.
Because some is more ambiguous than "Fewer than." Fewer than half gives you restrictions on the number. Some could be more than half or fewer than half.
There’s so much we have to relearn while studying for lsat. I didn’t know that fewer than half could mean zero
Referencing #5, is it safe to assume if "than half" or a phrase representing half is used, then we'll use most in some way? I know it might not always be this way, but just trying to get this straight in my head.
for question #4 the quantifier usually, are there other words that could imply other quantifiers? Maybe I missed the lessons discussing how usually means most, but that threw me for a loop. Anyone else?
@Hayes16 lessons didnt give any, this was just intuition but im sure you can find a list