While it may not true for all answer choices, this is how I approached this question based on its stimulus.
Considering the two rules for overall success: Economicsuccess & individual protection.
I knew that the correct answer choice was going to begin with an if-then clause, based on economic success, because one portion of the conjunction was covered (individual protection).
On harder questions the writers may do away with the basic "If-then" formula, but seeking the other rule is still relevant.
i got it right, but in my notes i wrote that it's ok to not be economically successful; as long as you protect liberties, you're successful. so i feel like the answer i chose (c) was the strongest but has nothing to do with guaranteeing overall success, as the present administration protected individual liberties anyways?
A question about the general definition of "may" on the LSAT: does it always mean "probable", and so anytime that it is used in a conditional, it renders it invalid? When I read the stimulus, I took it to mean as "allowed" e.g. "you may go".
I feel that the instructor for RC does a great job, but whoever is handling the LR stuff really falls short. Everything seems overly complicated and entirely dependent on these visual diagrams.
The whole idea behind LSAC eliminating Logic Games was that visually impaired test takers were at a disadvantage. I can't imagine that any visually impaired student who pays for 7Sage would benefit from this kind of analysis and breakdown. It's too geared towards a specific learning style.
I think that you have a point but I think that the entire system is underscored by conceptual understanding. The visual diagrams are just one way to handle the problems in LR. However, I think the instructor does a good job of emphasizing that while visual strategies of breaking down LR can be helpful what is most important is gaining conceptual mastery.
@leisdomi Agreed and well said... I feel like people who are "math-brained" might succeed with lawgic and diagrams but I have pretty much abandoned these strategies altogether. They actually confused things more for me when the answer would have otherwise been obvious.
It's because of the amount of information we were given in the problem. The problem outlined one concrete way for an administration to be successful: economic success AND protecting individual liberties. With this relationship given of
ES and PIL → Overall Success
we are then given a premise of an administration, one that does not protect the environment but does protect individual liberties. Because we aren't given any other information regarding economic success, we must assume C, where economic success by that political administration warrants overall success.
The trickiness might have come from the "conditional" of environmental protections, where what would have been a concrete "will" relationship was undermined by the word "may". Because of this, we cannot assume any relationship based on environmental protections, as they do not guarantee anything. Let me know if this makes sense.
The only two pieces of information the about the current administration are contained in the last sentence of the stimulus and are:
1. The current administration has not protected the environment.
2. The current administration has protected individual liberties.
(A) states that the current administration is economically successful. There is just no information to say whether this is true or not. IMO, this question really relies on the student to be tired and misread environment for economic for its difficulty.
EVEN IF the stimulus had added that the current administration was a success, we still wouldn't know if the current administration was an economic success because the author's reasoning goes:
Economic Success AND Protected Individual Liberties → Administration Success
IF we knew the administration was a success that would tell us nothing about the Economic Success of the administration because of sufficiency and necessity:
Economic Success AND Protected Individual Liberties → Administration Success
DOES NOT MEAN
Administration Success AND Protected Individual Liberties → Economic Success
In other words "If I am a whale and I am happy I must be in the ocean", does not mean "If I am in the ocean and I am happy I must be a whale".
I eliminated A because of the word both in the first sentence. For it to be considered an overall success, it NEEDS both. From the stimulus, we know the current administration has protected individual liberties, so it checks one box, but it doesn't mention whether or not "it's considered an overall success". If you pick A in this case, you're just assuming the administration is an overall success. But it could just as likely be false. C is correct because it guarantees they check the other box, which ultimately equates to them as an overall success.
I would still recommend watching at least the explanation as to why it's correct. Just to make sure you're understanding WHY you chose the right answer
I always watch the videos even when I am confident in my answer because I want to break down the processes that got me there so I can apply them to difficult questions
I'm a little bit confused. When it comes to "and/ or" in the sufficient condition side only one of the sufficient conditions has to be met? But when it comes to necessary conditions, both conditions have to be met for "and"?
A sufficient condition means that if A happens or B happens then C will occur. this means that A happening guarantees C and B also guarantees C. Or, it can be framed as necessary which i think looks like this: C will happen (C will surely come about if...) if A and B happens. this perspective requires both of those conditions to be met for C to occur, because its implying that both A and B are necessary for C to happen, but only together will they be enough (meet the requirements) for C to happen, not alone.
A sufficient condition means it is enough by itself to make something come about, whereas necessary means its important but not enough, or not the only condition needed.
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.
98 comments
Easy let’s go, one for one
While it may not true for all answer choices, this is how I approached this question based on its stimulus.
Considering the two rules for overall success: Economic success & individual protection.
I knew that the correct answer choice was going to begin with an if-then clause, based on economic success, because one portion of the conjunction was covered (individual protection).
On harder questions the writers may do away with the basic "If-then" formula, but seeking the other rule is still relevant.
ugh I second guessed myself. it was between b and c and I chose b both times not listening to my gut
Yes!!!
I can't believe I fell for that. Got it in BR. 🤦♀️
yaya got it right! :)
dang it! I fell for A lol
Welp, I fell for the trap. I went into hunt mode and saw A and clicked submit. Should have looked at the other answers as well.
Massive L but we bounce back
YESSIR on a streak rn! 39 sec!
took me twice the time but i got it right
Got it right upon BR
41 seconds baby!! :)
It’s hard to rely on visual concepts because it takes more time to write it down. I hope I can get faster at this by just picturing it in my head
It took me 8 minutes to get this into lawgic and then i got it right. So I still have some ways to go
@GloriaOnwugamba It took me 8 mins as well. LOL. I got it right too.
i was confused between A and C. Got it right in BR. My god, i am struggling.
You’ve got this! We all do
Conditional logic is the bane of my existence. I’m so bad at it.
i got it right, but in my notes i wrote that it's ok to not be economically successful; as long as you protect liberties, you're successful. so i feel like the answer i chose (c) was the strongest but has nothing to do with guaranteeing overall success, as the present administration protected individual liberties anyways?
A question about the general definition of "may" on the LSAT: does it always mean "probable", and so anytime that it is used in a conditional, it renders it invalid? When I read the stimulus, I took it to mean as "allowed" e.g. "you may go".
I feel that the instructor for RC does a great job, but whoever is handling the LR stuff really falls short. Everything seems overly complicated and entirely dependent on these visual diagrams.
The whole idea behind LSAC eliminating Logic Games was that visually impaired test takers were at a disadvantage. I can't imagine that any visually impaired student who pays for 7Sage would benefit from this kind of analysis and breakdown. It's too geared towards a specific learning style.
I think that you have a point but I think that the entire system is underscored by conceptual understanding. The visual diagrams are just one way to handle the problems in LR. However, I think the instructor does a good job of emphasizing that while visual strategies of breaking down LR can be helpful what is most important is gaining conceptual mastery.
@leisdomi Agreed and well said... I feel like people who are "math-brained" might succeed with lawgic and diagrams but I have pretty much abandoned these strategies altogether. They actually confused things more for me when the answer would have otherwise been obvious.
I got the question right, but in my blind review, I chose A. Can anyone explain why C is correct and not A.
It's because of the amount of information we were given in the problem. The problem outlined one concrete way for an administration to be successful: economic success AND protecting individual liberties. With this relationship given of
ES and PIL → Overall Success
we are then given a premise of an administration, one that does not protect the environment but does protect individual liberties. Because we aren't given any other information regarding economic success, we must assume C, where economic success by that political administration warrants overall success.
The trickiness might have come from the "conditional" of environmental protections, where what would have been a concrete "will" relationship was undermined by the word "may". Because of this, we cannot assume any relationship based on environmental protections, as they do not guarantee anything. Let me know if this makes sense.
The only two pieces of information the about the current administration are contained in the last sentence of the stimulus and are:
1. The current administration has not protected the environment.
2. The current administration has protected individual liberties.
(A) states that the current administration is economically successful. There is just no information to say whether this is true or not. IMO, this question really relies on the student to be tired and misread environment for economic for its difficulty.
EVEN IF the stimulus had added that the current administration was a success, we still wouldn't know if the current administration was an economic success because the author's reasoning goes:
Economic Success AND Protected Individual Liberties → Administration Success
IF we knew the administration was a success that would tell us nothing about the Economic Success of the administration because of sufficiency and necessity:
Economic Success AND Protected Individual Liberties → Administration Success
DOES NOT MEAN
Administration Success AND Protected Individual Liberties → Economic Success
In other words "If I am a whale and I am happy I must be in the ocean", does not mean "If I am in the ocean and I am happy I must be a whale".
I eliminated A because of the word both in the first sentence. For it to be considered an overall success, it NEEDS both. From the stimulus, we know the current administration has protected individual liberties, so it checks one box, but it doesn't mention whether or not "it's considered an overall success". If you pick A in this case, you're just assuming the administration is an overall success. But it could just as likely be false. C is correct because it guarantees they check the other box, which ultimately equates to them as an overall success.
I am getting all these questions right!!! my timing is off but I feel confident!
I am getting questions right, but my timing is off.
Do you guys watch the videos even though you are confident in your answer and you got it right or should I just not waste my time?
If there was any hesitation then I do, if not I move on.
I would still recommend watching at least the explanation as to why it's correct. Just to make sure you're understanding WHY you chose the right answer
yeah I still do because sometimes I am still confused about my answer
I always watch the videos even when I am confident in my answer because I want to break down the processes that got me there so I can apply them to difficult questions
I'm a little bit confused. When it comes to "and/ or" in the sufficient condition side only one of the sufficient conditions has to be met? But when it comes to necessary conditions, both conditions have to be met for "and"?
A sufficient condition means that if A happens or B happens then C will occur. this means that A happening guarantees C and B also guarantees C. Or, it can be framed as necessary which i think looks like this: C will happen (C will surely come about if...) if A and B happens. this perspective requires both of those conditions to be met for C to occur, because its implying that both A and B are necessary for C to happen, but only together will they be enough (meet the requirements) for C to happen, not alone.
A sufficient condition means it is enough by itself to make something come about, whereas necessary means its important but not enough, or not the only condition needed.
I had the correct answer and switched it.