Yes. Sometimes the two overlap. You can think about it this way: if you want to buy a lollipop that costs $50, having $49 in your wallet is necessary, but not sufficient. Having $50 will be necessary AND sufficient. Having $51 will be sufficient, but no longer necessary. Something like that.
Yes, its called a bi-conditional. They are covered in the "advanced logic" portion of the syllabus. An example would be "A if and only if B," or A(---)B.
Necessary can be sufficient, but I don’t think a sufficient can be necessary. I’d love to hear others thoughts on this though.
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.
8 comments
Yes. Sometimes the two overlap. You can think about it this way: if you want to buy a lollipop that costs $50, having $49 in your wallet is necessary, but not sufficient. Having $50 will be necessary AND sufficient. Having $51 will be sufficient, but no longer necessary. Something like that.
Yes, its called a bi-conditional. They are covered in the "advanced logic" portion of the syllabus. An example would be "A if and only if B," or A(---)B.
@joncampbell04301 said:
Yes- and saying that something is "necessary and sufficient" is exactly the same as saying something is "sufficient and necessary"
A certain philosopher on PT 69 would like to have a word about this!
Short answer, yes--sometimes.
@joncampbell04301 said:
Yes- and saying that something is "necessary and sufficient" is exactly the same as saying something is "sufficient and necessary"
I think this sufficiently answers the question but it might not necessarily go into enough detail :)
(Honestly just wanted to play with the words - I think it's a great answer)
Yes- and saying that something is "necessary and sufficient" is exactly the same as saying something is "sufficient and necessary"
I suppose a sufficient assumption can be a necessary assumption if that sufficiency is singular (no other sufficiency exists).
Necessary can be sufficient, but I don’t think a sufficient can be necessary. I’d love to hear others thoughts on this though.