got it right in under 0:56 seconds. i was torn between two choices but then i remembered one of the things from one of the earlier answers and switched answers🥳
Can't believe this is a 5 stars quesiton. I feel like these lessons have been so useful. I was able to get this question right very confidently because I started being able to tune out the noise in the stimlus and kick ideas up the domain. Thanks JY!
I'm terrible with all the little tricks we've learned thus far so dunno why I seem to get some of these right so instinctively. It felt like "oh this answer has to address every claim in the stem, right?" and I was right.
Which is to say: the correct answer must correctly connect the conditional statements across the entire argument
note to self for learning. CF and R are public places. Most WD feature artwork. Over stepping when we think the CFs are WD featuring artwork. they could be a subset of the WD places that do not feature artwork. The "most" implies this. It is not all.
Wow I cannot believe I answered this one correctly. So far I have been a huge why would I map out lawgic, and I needed it for this question to get it correct. Without lawgic there is no chance I would have answered this question correctly.
So for MBT questions, I go with definite claims that use "Any", "All", "every" etc., but for the MSS questions, going for the "most", "some" etc, makes more sense. I think recognizing this patern let me get the answer right.
My problem with AC C being wrong is that it reads as though since all coffee houses are public places, then it appears as though it would fit the rule of "most well designed public places feature artwork". I still don't get even after the explanation how that is wrong.
@BrydenSolonar I initially selected AC C before blind review, this is how I understand it. Yes, all coffeehouses are public places, but the stimulus reads "All coffeehouses AND restaurants are public places". Now, what if there are only 3 coffee shops and 40 restaurants? If all of the restaurants are well-designed and feature artwork, the rule that 'most well designed public places feature artwork' still holds, without necessitating that most (or any for that matter) coffeehouses feature artwork.
@DannyH28 Additionally you can replace restaurants in my explanation with any public place and the logic still holds. Replace restaurants with Parks, Courts, Govt. Offices etc.
With the mapping and diagramming I can see why those answers are wrong, but the correct answer is also wrong. Must be true is false in the case of D as uncomfortable and not well designed does not automatically translate to comfortable and well designed. There's a middleground between well designed and not well designed, it isn't either or. Under the logic of the paragraph, the assumption you are making here is that it is well designed if it is comfortable. Why? Please explain a reason other than just "you take the contrapositive because that's how you solve it". It doesn't have to be well designed, no condition says so in the paragraph. Only that it isn't well designed if it IS uncomfortable. Not that it HAS to be well designed if it is comfortable. Thus well designed and spacious don't have any necessary link and DO NOT have to be true.
@MichaelSanantonio What adjective would you use for something that is neither well designed nor not well designed? Or neither comfortable nor uncomfortable? Theoretically those categories could exist, but I think the LSAT writers are expecting you to assume that the modifiers un- and not correspond to "/" in lawgic, i.e. they're binary. That's not necessarily something you could use a formal logic rule to determine, I think you just have to weigh the actual meaning of the words.
@HenryStauch422 The issue I had was I took the contrapositive to mean not uncomfortable not comfortable. Just as 7sage covers a spectrum range of levels of proof, comfort also falls into that category, and in real life, is not binary. While I see why it is the most correct answer by definition, I also think it makes a sort of assumption at least the way I took it, in that everything that isn't uncomfortable has to be comfortable and thus spacous. Neutral comfort or not uncomfortable is what I was thinking but by definition maybe those aren't even actually possible even though they are in society and in common sense. That's why I was tripped up because to me none of the answers seemed correct. Same thing for not well designed and not not well designed.
Did this question by diagramming and hunted directly for the answer i was looking for, didn't even read the rest of the answer choices. Might actually be a potentially good method, as some of those answer choices are really misleading. I only noticed how B was misleading after I submitted my answer. Got 29 seconds under!
mapping it out and kicking ideas up to the domain definitely helps with these question. remembering the group indicators definitely helps me with these question.
I have always hated these types of questions. The chains have always brought me down (see what I did there?). Tonight, I can happily say that I actually got this one right, after spending about 9 minutes and 30 seconds on it. I graphed it all out and just went through graphing the answers out, and it was right infront of me. Don't ever give up! You've got this, and you should be proud of yourself for even trying! :) Good luck!
I find it easiest to skip the first 2 sentences and take the contrapositive of the next sentence so you can make it all positive. Switching "if a public space is uncomfortable it is not well designed" into "if it is well designed, it is comfortable." Then, just assign the "a - b - c = a - c" logic to "well designed - comfortable - spacious interiors = well designed - spacious interiors. " This gives you D relatively easily.
okay so he only makes sense of all this by mapping it out. we don't even get notes the day of (for these sections, not essays) so we're expected to do this in our heads? i am certain there has to be an easier way.
@eimanintikhab I think you're supposed to kick the unimportant stuff like cafe's and restaurants up. Then you do what we did with the last practice where you map the rest and pick the answer that applies. Just remember to use negation for some concepts instead of making new symbols to make it easier(like here remember to just negate comfortable instead of separating uncomfy and comfy)
When I was initially mapping out this question, I had "comfortable" and "uncomfortable" as separate ideas in the lawgic chain. When I instead understood "uncomfortable" as the negation of "comfortable," this question became a lot easier!
390 comments
got it right in under 0:56 seconds. i was torn between two choices but then i remembered one of the things from one of the earlier answers and switched answers🥳
Can't believe this is a 5 stars quesiton. I feel like these lessons have been so useful. I was able to get this question right very confidently because I started being able to tune out the noise in the stimlus and kick ideas up the domain. Thanks JY!
First try in 00:56!!
I'm terrible with all the little tricks we've learned thus far so dunno why I seem to get some of these right so instinctively. It felt like "oh this answer has to address every claim in the stem, right?" and I was right.
Which is to say: the correct answer must correctly connect the conditional statements across the entire argument
note to self for learning. CF and R are public places. Most WD feature artwork. Over stepping when we think the CFs are WD featuring artwork. they could be a subset of the WD places that do not feature artwork. The "most" implies this. It is not all.
Dude, did anyone get the new update for highlighting things? I was like, where did it go? lol
@marikitten03 no seriously, where is it??
Was like welp, will just use a paper
Wow I cannot believe I answered this one correctly. So far I have been a huge why would I map out lawgic, and I needed it for this question to get it correct. Without lawgic there is no chance I would have answered this question correctly.
YESSSSSSSSSSS, I GOT TS RIGHT BOYYYYYY. LEVEL 5 AT THAT!!!!
first level 5 that i found easy!!!!!
So for MBT questions, I go with definite claims that use "Any", "All", "every" etc., but for the MSS questions, going for the "most", "some" etc, makes more sense. I think recognizing this patern let me get the answer right.
My problem with AC C being wrong is that it reads as though since all coffee houses are public places, then it appears as though it would fit the rule of "most well designed public places feature artwork". I still don't get even after the explanation how that is wrong.
@BrydenSolonar I initially selected AC C before blind review, this is how I understand it. Yes, all coffeehouses are public places, but the stimulus reads "All coffeehouses AND restaurants are public places". Now, what if there are only 3 coffee shops and 40 restaurants? If all of the restaurants are well-designed and feature artwork, the rule that 'most well designed public places feature artwork' still holds, without necessitating that most (or any for that matter) coffeehouses feature artwork.
@DannyH28 Additionally you can replace restaurants in my explanation with any public place and the logic still holds. Replace restaurants with Parks, Courts, Govt. Offices etc.
With the mapping and diagramming I can see why those answers are wrong, but the correct answer is also wrong. Must be true is false in the case of D as uncomfortable and not well designed does not automatically translate to comfortable and well designed. There's a middleground between well designed and not well designed, it isn't either or. Under the logic of the paragraph, the assumption you are making here is that it is well designed if it is comfortable. Why? Please explain a reason other than just "you take the contrapositive because that's how you solve it". It doesn't have to be well designed, no condition says so in the paragraph. Only that it isn't well designed if it IS uncomfortable. Not that it HAS to be well designed if it is comfortable. Thus well designed and spacious don't have any necessary link and DO NOT have to be true.
@MichaelSanantonio What adjective would you use for something that is neither well designed nor not well designed? Or neither comfortable nor uncomfortable? Theoretically those categories could exist, but I think the LSAT writers are expecting you to assume that the modifiers un- and not correspond to "/" in lawgic, i.e. they're binary. That's not necessarily something you could use a formal logic rule to determine, I think you just have to weigh the actual meaning of the words.
@HenryStauch422 The issue I had was I took the contrapositive to mean not uncomfortable not comfortable. Just as 7sage covers a spectrum range of levels of proof, comfort also falls into that category, and in real life, is not binary. While I see why it is the most correct answer by definition, I also think it makes a sort of assumption at least the way I took it, in that everything that isn't uncomfortable has to be comfortable and thus spacous. Neutral comfort or not uncomfortable is what I was thinking but by definition maybe those aren't even actually possible even though they are in society and in common sense. That's why I was tripped up because to me none of the answers seemed correct. Same thing for not well designed and not not well designed.
How can we assume that "not uncomfortable" is comfortable. I know it makes sense, but I remember a lesson where it was not accurate to do this?
Did this question by diagramming and hunted directly for the answer i was looking for, didn't even read the rest of the answer choices. Might actually be a potentially good method, as some of those answer choices are really misleading. I only noticed how B was misleading after I submitted my answer. Got 29 seconds under!
Got it right first try! Feeling confident.... ignore the fact it was 5:14 over target time..
my dumb ahhh wrote it right as:
well designed -> comfortable -> spacious
and still picked the wrong answer lol... now I see it obvi bro
mapping it out and kicking ideas up to the domain definitely helps with these question. remembering the group indicators definitely helps me with these question.
Not even close, and the answer was clear. smh
I was so confident in C this was tricky
I have always hated these types of questions. The chains have always brought me down (see what I did there?). Tonight, I can happily say that I actually got this one right, after spending about 9 minutes and 30 seconds on it. I graphed it all out and just went through graphing the answers out, and it was right infront of me. Don't ever give up! You've got this, and you should be proud of yourself for even trying! :) Good luck!
I find it easiest to skip the first 2 sentences and take the contrapositive of the next sentence so you can make it all positive. Switching "if a public space is uncomfortable it is not well designed" into "if it is well designed, it is comfortable." Then, just assign the "a - b - c = a - c" logic to "well designed - comfortable - spacious interiors = well designed - spacious interiors. " This gives you D relatively easily.
okay so he only makes sense of all this by mapping it out. we don't even get notes the day of (for these sections, not essays) so we're expected to do this in our heads? i am certain there has to be an easier way.
@eimanintikhab I think you're supposed to kick the unimportant stuff like cafe's and restaurants up. Then you do what we did with the last practice where you map the rest and pick the answer that applies. Just remember to use negation for some concepts instead of making new symbols to make it easier(like here remember to just negate comfortable instead of separating uncomfy and comfy)
@ZakariaHakim thank you! this is really useful
When I was initially mapping out this question, I had "comfortable" and "uncomfortable" as separate ideas in the lawgic chain. When I instead understood "uncomfortable" as the negation of "comfortable," this question became a lot easier!
still don't understand why we cant establish a stronger relationship between Coffee Houses and Public places that are well designed.
If all Coffee Houses are Public Places cant we say: CH-> PP
And since Most PP that are well designed feature art work cant we say: PP+WD -> FA
Which would mean we can say CH + PP -> FA
Dang that was a rough one
I got it on a BR after I mapped the sht out of this; C tripped me up