Discussions

LSAT

New post

210 posts in the last 30 days

This is lesson 6/16 in the Advanced Logic Section. On DeMorgans law. Question 1. Translate the sentence into logic.

"Unless the leather is soaked and tanned for 3 days, the resulting boot will be smelly."

The right answer is

/S or /T ---> BS

contrap: /BS ---> S & T

Why does it turn from an “and” to an “or” statement if you choose /S & /T as the sufficient condition?

I thought that for “unless” conditionals, you just pick one statement and negate it and that’s the sufficient.

I’m choosing S & T as the sufficient, and BS as the necessary.

so

/S & /T —> BS

If the leather isn’t soaked and tanned, the boot will be smelly.

so the contrapositive would be…

/BS –> S or T

If the boot isn’t smelly, the leather was soaked or tanned.

I see that I’m wrong but I don’t understand why.

Is it just..whenever an & statement is negated, it turns into an or statement? and whenever an or statement is negated it turns into an & statement?

I’m super confused bc now I’m looking at the contrapositive of #2 on that quiz and it’s /S & /H —> E or D

If "and" statements turn into "or" statements when they’re negated then why isn’t that the case here >.<

P.S. I do know the splitting rules it's just hard to type onto here so I left it without splits.

0

This is a principle question.

I'm actually completely lost on this one.

I thought the principle to be extracted from the stimulus was somewhere along the lines of, in order to gain acceptance for a theory, there needs to be some evidence to support the ideas expounded in the theory.

The reason I thought this was because even though scientists did not find such a force as evidence, new instruments allowed continental movement to be confirmed by observation which I thought acted as evidence.

A) No idea what to make of this or do with this

B) Doesn't do anything to the argument. In this particular theory science has not identified the force, so this answer choice is irrelevant.

C) This I think could be considered irrelevant, this changes the scope of the argument. Measuring instruments appear to make theories harder to work out, what does that have to do with the stimulus? Absolutely nothing.

D) Science is concerned with mass behavior, ok, but what does mass behavior have to do with a force that can make the continents move? Nothing. I think this is irrelevant.

E) This is the correct answer. I can see how this could be correct because there is no explanation for the posited theory, yet the evidence is there/detected.

I guess if someone could explain why A is wrong and why E is correct that would be great. I was really confused with this question.

0

I ran into this on a Principle question. I diagrammed it as a unless condition, I was not completely sure though and really nervous about it.

Is it the same as either or/or not both? I looked in my notes for the group 1-4 lessons and I didn't find it in there.

0

Hi,

I'm on my study break and well..... bored.

I figured at this point you've decided that you are going to take it or you aren't sooooo how many people on 7sage are taking the September LSAT? And where? Maybe people can meet up with each other before and/or after the test! On that note, I am taking mine at Brooklyn College (I think?.. I should probably check...).

Oh and 39 more days. Enjoy!

0

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-67-section-3-game-4/

I was not sure about the question sentence...it says "If three subzones in all are designated for retail use and a subzone in Z2 is designated for housing, then which one of the following is allowed?"

But zone1 cannot have R, why it says "If three subzones in all..." I thought it's just impossible...where did I misread the question sentence?

0

I'm having hard time to solve substitution Qs like PT58,S2,Q12 and PT59,S1,Q10.

Is there any effective tactic to crack this kind of the Qs?

Please someone enlighten me.

Thanks in advance!

0

Hi, So I was wondering what is the best strategy to adopt for bubbling the answers on the answer sheet for the LR section? Is it best to bubble per question, or once you've solved all questions on both the open pages, or after having solved all questions possible in the entire section? This may sound trivial, but I have been experimenting with different strategies and they have a not so insignificant impact on my timing. Just wanted to know what works best for most people and if there is a consensus on which one to follow.

0

When you see a conditional statement in either the stimulus or the answer choice, do you always translate to the contrapositive to check if it matches your pre-phrase? I noticed that I almost never translate to the contrapositive, and that may be why I get hard sufficient assumption questions wrong. It seems like you HAVE to translate to the contrapositive because that's how the test designers make it more difficult.

A good example is PT73, S2, Q12. The correct answer as well as the most tempting have to be translated to the contrapositive to fill the gap, and the translation also gets at the nuance in their differences.

What does everyone think?

0

This is a Method of Reasoning question.

I really need help in understanding why answer choice C is wrong. I understand why A is correct and why the other ones are wrong, my reasoning is below:

A) The premise is more people would put money in their savings accounts, the challenge is the past initiative with money being diverted from personal savings and net personal savings remaining unchanged.

B) The disagreement is with the author and a group of policymakers not "among policymakers".

C) I really don't know, this answer choice looks good to me. Isn't the author saying it is more likely to fail because of initiatives in the past did not bring about the change the policymakers desire. Would this answer choice be incorrect because it is too definite?

D) This one can be eliminated because we do not know that this group of policymakers are the same policymakers that advocated the past initiatives. Perhaps they were young kids during that time and not policymakers.

E) The author is not disputing the assumption that a program to encourage personal savings is needed, he is trying to dispute the fact that it will work. He indicates it is not likely to work because of attempts in the past that failed.

0

I don't know about any of you, but RC was my weakest section. I was shocked at this because I am a very good reader. What I have concluded is it was my weakest section because of attitude towards it, not because I don't understand the material. Ever since I changed my attitude about the section, my score improved. I tried really hard to be positive and WANT to do the section, rather than HAVING to do the section. I also tried to steer away from looking at the questions as simply questions and I started to look at it is as more of figuring out a puzzle ( answering the questions is putting the puzzle together). I found I was better able to interact with the passage and the questions.

Maybe I am actually just going insane, but I think attitude is everything.

Happy studying you smarties :)

1

For some reason I can't remember exactly what these question types are called, but they're typically at the beginning of each section and read something like, "Which one of the following could be the composition of each of the teams...." So if someone could refresh my memory on what exactly this question type is called....that would be great!

For these questions we're supposed to go through the rules one by one and eliminate incorrect answers.

My question is this: Typically I find that each rule eliminates ONLY 1 answer choice. There are rare instances where a rule will eliminate 2 answer choices, but this is rare. After I identify an answer choice that a rule eliminates, should I continue to apply that rule to the other options, or can I move on to the next rule. In the interest of time, I've been moving on to the next rule after eliminating an answer choice.

0

So the correct answer is A. I'm really confused by the answer choices and the stimulus.

When I read it, I initially thought this is an extreme example that uses examples within examples because the whole point of the example is that people would elect to feel 75% of their age. However, the example keeps going back with the ages and I don't think his ultimate conclusion is representative of how someone at 48 years old would feel.

My issue with A is it says projecting many responses from many individuals, and while the stimulus acknowledges that it's example is using a hypothetical person not all the diversity of age responses recorded.

B) looked very attractive to me

C) Also looks attractive, but I think there isn't an overly sweeping generalization, it is making a generalization from recorded responses.

D) The first part of this looks good to me, but the author never claims one of the statements is false, he uses it to prove a point.

E) There is nothing about experimenter expectations of respondents, or manipulation of responses, so I think this answer choice is irrelevant.

PLEASE HELP!! Because I hate this question and am really stuck. :/

0

My plan was to wait until 4 weeks to rip into the most recent ptests (60s and 70s). Someone who took the LSAT told me to do these recent tests closer to the test date since they are fresh tests that gauge my skills and give me a good indication of what I'll score.

But I'm thinking that it's more important to get a feel for the modern tests earlier than it is to get an indication of what I'll score. Maybe I should just get started on these already?

(p.s. I've already done some p-tests in those range: 60-64, 68, 69, 70, 72)

Thanks, y'all!

0

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-55-section-1-question-21/

I narrowed this question down to A and B but ultimately chose A.

A isn't necessarily wrong, but since this is a "most closely conforms" question, B was determined to more closely conform to the advertisers reasoning. I understand how this could be the case, but it does raise a question about relative terms like "many."

I'm hoping someone can provide some clarity.

The stimulus says that, "advertisers will not pay to have their commercials aired during a TV show unless many people watching the show buy the advertised products."

Correct Answer (B) states, "If a TV show would be canceled unless many people took certain actions..."

When many is used in the stimulus it is used to refer to a subset of people. Namely, those who watch a specific show.

When many is used in (B), it is used in a general sense.

I crossed (B) off because I thought these two instances of "many" were very different.

Say 200 people watch a certain show. Let's say many people, in this instance, is 150 people. In the general sense, this might not be considered many people, since many is a relative term. I mean, if we're just talking generally, who knows what many is.

0

I was watching J.Y explanation for PT 68 Game 2 and he mentions that the stimulus allows for one day to be empty, and later on using the rules he infers that none of the days will be empty. But during the time section when I was reading the stimulus I thought otherwise because it mentions "hearing takes exactly three days" and I automatically thought this means at least one witness per day because if one day is empty the hearing does not takes exactly three days but happens between Monday to Wednesday.

My question is that, did I get lucky or I am allowed to make such deduction?

0

This is a method of reasoning question. I don't understand answer choices A and C. If someone could explain those to me, I would be most appreciative!

A) Literary theory could be considered myths. What throws me off of this one is scientific explanation, couldn't it mean that the second part of J's argument "Myths are not told..because they are no longer bodies of generally accepted truths.." be considered a scientific explanation supporting his first claim? The only thing that makes me think you could eliminate this answer choice is the word problem, because he and G never indicate that there is a problem of myths only giving different explanations (one saying it is solely in the traditional world, and another saying it can also be in the modern world).

B) While G advances an analogous situation, this answer choice can be eliminated because it is not address the generally accepted truths aspect and acknowledges its example is not a narrative which would not be included in J's version of myth.

C) I have no idea other than J does address a distinction between traditional societies and the modern world.

D) It does not do this, regardless this is irrelevant.

E) It does call into question J's version/definition of myth by showing an example where a myth is not a narrative but still operates as a myth.

Please help! Thanks!!

0

This is a method of reasoning questions.

If someone can explain to me why B and D are incorrect and C is correct I would really appreciate it. This is my reasoning:

A) A does not accept C's criterion, she says concepts were widely understood.

B) She does discredit C's evidence by saying that the concept was widely understood in Franchot's time, so she was not ahead of her time. I guess this is wrong bc she does not generalize from new evidence, but couldn't one say she is generalizing by stating what the stipulations for a great writer are? I guess you could mark this as wrong because there isn't any new evidence other than her claim that social consequences were widely understood (but we do not know that this is new evidence, correct?)

C) This seems correct because A rejects C's criterion for what makes a great writer and disputes the specific claim that F was a great writer.

D) She does dispute C's conclusion. She says F was not a great writer and she does present facts for the same criterion (what makes a great writer), it is alternative in the sense that it has different requirements.

E) A does not attack one of C's claims, she simply disagrees with it. She does not criticize the structure of C's argument.

So if someone could go over B and D with me, I would be incredibly grateful. Also, if you could look at my reasoning and see if it is ok, I would be incredibly appreciative.

Thank you in advance!!

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?