Why would "only a minority of New Yorkers" not be a correct negation of "Most New Yorkers?"
Most = 51% or more
Only a minority = a small percentage, or in other words, NOT most.
Directly from Google: "A minority generally refers to a subset of a larger group that makes up less than half of the total. The term has specific applications across sociology, law, and everyday language."
@samacus44 it's moreso an opposite. negating is saying it's not true. while most new yorkers riding the train isn't true, we can't just assume the opposite (only a minority of new yorkers ride the train) is true for LSAT logic. contextually, there are cases where it's within a "reasonable" amount to assume the opposite being true.
claim: "the coin landed tails"
it's "reasonable" to claim that if the coin didn't land tails, it would land heads.
Hi all, I made another flashcard set. This time for memorizing Quantifiers. Flashcards are what really helped me in undergrad and so I decided to make them to companion my 7sage studies. Thought I'd share to help others who would benefit :) made a folder that I will most likely add more sets to as I go. Much Love and happy studying! https://quizlet.com/user/ehoffmanwallace/folders/lsat-7sage-flashcards
This lesson makes it more complicated than it has to be. The easiest way to think of the negation of most in everyday language is just "less than most".
@aviemann In that case that would rule out the "exactly half" option, since if it is not the case that most A are B, then that could mean there is an equal amount of A and B.
For example, Most dogs are cute. Negation is: Anywhere from none to exactly half of dogs are cute /(D -m-> C). Whereas, most dogs are NOT cute is completely different, D -m-> /C.
On a scale of 0-100: Most dogs are cute will be 51 -100 cute dogs. Negation will be 0-50 cute dogs. Whereas, "Most dogs are not cute" will mean 51-100 dogs are not cute.
Can the negated version "Anywhere from none to exactly half of A are B" be two conditional relationships joined by the exclusive "or"? (or the inclusive and/or, we just know that the "and" situation wouldn't happen because you can't have some and none together)
Each relationship:
Some A are B: A ←s→ B
No A are B: A → /B
Together:
(A ←s→ B ) or (A → /B)
Could this be valuable in some circumstances? Maybe to find the broken down possibilities in an answer choice?
#feedback So we decline what he said in the first half of this lesson. Videos 1-16; he told SOME AND MOST don't have A CONTRAPOSITIVE. Because now he's teaching us they do? Am I right? They technically have contrapositives now.
They do not have contrapositives; rather, what we are learning now are the complete negation of most some and all statements, meaning they are the OPPISITES of what is being said. I was confused at first, too. This seems like it would be relevant in weaken, must be true EXCEPT, or must be false question types.
No, 'some' and 'most' don't have a contrapositive.
A contrapositive is another way to express a conditional relationship. Every conditional relationship can be expressed in its contrapositive form:
A --> B
/B --> /A
In order to express the contrapositive, we switch both sides of the arrow and negate each term. That's why B became /B and on the left. And A became /A and on the right.
In this lesson and the previous one we are talking about negating a 'Some' or 'Most' Statement. Negation is not the same thing as a contrapositive. Negation = what it means to say that the concept/statement is not true. Negation is involved in how we describe a contrapositive, but it's not the same thing as a contrapositive.
#feedback Just to clarify, the negation of most is NOT some. The reason why is some can imply that at least one person does. In this case, the range is 0-50 so it doesn't have to be one.
I am a bit confused as to these negations relevancy? I understand being familiar with being presented a relationship like this but is that the only reason it was included in foundations?
Trust that these types of questions appear on LR sections and you need to be prepared to not freeze trying to understand how to negate it, so its best to include it in your foundational knowledge.. i speak from experience of freezing lol
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!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
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.
82 comments
Why would "only a minority of New Yorkers" not be a correct negation of "Most New Yorkers?"
Most = 51% or more
Only a minority = a small percentage, or in other words, NOT most.
Directly from Google: "A minority generally refers to a subset of a larger group that makes up less than half of the total. The term has specific applications across sociology, law, and everyday language."
@samacus44 it's moreso an opposite. negating is saying it's not true. while most new yorkers riding the train isn't true, we can't just assume the opposite (only a minority of new yorkers ride the train) is true for LSAT logic. contextually, there are cases where it's within a "reasonable" amount to assume the opposite being true.
claim: "the coin landed tails"
it's "reasonable" to claim that if the coin didn't land tails, it would land heads.
negate =/= opposite
Can this also negate to "some"? Or "not all"?
"few to no" New Yorkers ride the train is close, but does not cover the case where exactly 50% ride the train lol Oh well
Hi all, I made another flashcard set. This time for memorizing Quantifiers. Flashcards are what really helped me in undergrad and so I decided to make them to companion my 7sage studies. Thought I'd share to help others who would benefit :) made a folder that I will most likely add more sets to as I go. Much Love and happy studying! https://quizlet.com/user/ehoffmanwallace/folders/lsat-7sage-flashcards
This lesson makes it more complicated than it has to be. The easiest way to think of the negation of most in everyday language is just "less than most".
@mhenwohl I think you're right here. I don't think writing this out into lawgic would be helpful
As per the last Skill Builder: NOT MOST = HALF OR FEWER THAN HALF
Therefore: half or fewer than half of New Yorkers ride the train - not most New Yorkers ride the train.
NYer -m-> /TRAIN
could it also be that if not most, all? (it is not the case that most ride subway. in fact, all new yorkers ride subway)
@lilykuz no, i don't think so, because it has to be half or fewer than half. all is a subset of most, so if it falls into all, it falls into most.
67
@ramrob2k12 dead
@ramrob2k12 Haha 67
@ramrob2k12
GET ME OUTTA HERE
Most A are B.
Negated:
It's not the case that most A are B.
Half or less of A are B.
Is "Half or Less of A are B" an accurate translation of this concept?
#Feedback
#Tutor #Instructor
Most clowns are unionized
Negation: /(C-m->U) "It's not the case that most clowns are unionized"
Translated: 0-50% of clowns are unionized
Original: Most vegans who are mute are kind
Negated: It's not the case that most vegans who are mute are kind
Translated: 0-50% of vegans who are mute are kind
Cant you just say MOST A are not B
@aviemann would love follow up on this as well!!
@aviemann In that case that would rule out the "exactly half" option, since if it is not the case that most A are B, then that could mean there is an equal amount of A and B.
@aviemann I don't think that's correct.
For example, Most dogs are cute. Negation is: Anywhere from none to exactly half of dogs are cute /(D -m-> C). Whereas, most dogs are NOT cute is completely different, D -m-> /C.
On a scale of 0-100: Most dogs are cute will be 51 -100 cute dogs. Negation will be 0-50 cute dogs. Whereas, "Most dogs are not cute" will mean 51-100 dogs are not cute.
Can the negated version "Anywhere from none to exactly half of A are B" be two conditional relationships joined by the exclusive "or"? (or the inclusive and/or, we just know that the "and" situation wouldn't happen because you can't have some and none together)
Each relationship:
Some A are B: A ←s→ B
No A are B: A → /B
Together:
(A ←s→ B ) or (A → /B)
Could this be valuable in some circumstances? Maybe to find the broken down possibilities in an answer choice?
Actually, never mind. "Some" can include "more than half", so that doesn't work!
@rainbowshwa most A are /B OR half of A are B could maybe work, but that feels ineffective...
Would the negation of most be equivalent to the idea of few?
No, because "few" implies more than 0%. "Not most" can potentially mean 0%.
@ciwsoller @mariafreese
Was thinking this also. Thanks for the Q&A
Why are we negating so much? What is this going to do?
is it ok that this makes way more sense to me with just words and not lawgic??
i agree i feel like the lawgic is almost like math which is totally overcomplicating it for me
this was fairly simple
So when you negate a "most" statement, "none" "few" "some" "many" could be true?
Most: Greater than 50%
Negating "Most" means: Less than or equal to 50%
Many: More than a some
Some: Lower boundary of 1 up to 100%. (which includes the less than 50%).
None: 0 or 0% which is less than 50%
Few: At least "Some" definition & less than "most "definition.
So yeah any of those options could be true for "not most", which is probably why it's simpler to write /(x -m> y).
Would "all" or 100% also be considered as "not most"? Or is it only half or less?
#feedback So we decline what he said in the first half of this lesson. Videos 1-16; he told SOME AND MOST don't have A CONTRAPOSITIVE. Because now he's teaching us they do? Am I right? They technically have contrapositives now.
They do not have contrapositives; rather, what we are learning now are the complete negation of most some and all statements, meaning they are the OPPISITES of what is being said. I was confused at first, too. This seems like it would be relevant in weaken, must be true EXCEPT, or must be false question types.
No, 'some' and 'most' don't have a contrapositive.
A contrapositive is another way to express a conditional relationship. Every conditional relationship can be expressed in its contrapositive form:
A --> B
/B --> /A
In order to express the contrapositive, we switch both sides of the arrow and negate each term. That's why B became /B and on the left. And A became /A and on the right.
In this lesson and the previous one we are talking about negating a 'Some' or 'Most' Statement. Negation is not the same thing as a contrapositive. Negation = what it means to say that the concept/statement is not true. Negation is involved in how we describe a contrapositive, but it's not the same thing as a contrapositive.
can you say a FEW nyers ride the train?
That is a possibility, but you cannot logically infer that as the fact that 0% ride the train is also a possibility
#feedback Just to clarify, the negation of most is NOT some. The reason why is some can imply that at least one person does. In this case, the range is 0-50 so it doesn't have to be one.
Just want to be sure I am getting this right!
Yep that's right as far as I can tell
I am a bit confused as to these negations relevancy? I understand being familiar with being presented a relationship like this but is that the only reason it was included in foundations?
Trust that these types of questions appear on LR sections and you need to be prepared to not freeze trying to understand how to negate it, so its best to include it in your foundational knowledge.. i speak from experience of freezing lol
Kevin Lin has a video on negation that makes a bit more sense: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hao4RlRa0e0
Why can't we negate "Most New Yorkers ride the train" to "No more than half of the New Yorkers ride the train"
I think its technically the same thing