Hello. I have been having some trouble with actually solidifying my understanding of the meaning of Sufficient Conditions and Necessary Conditions as I found the information provided in the core curriculum in regard to the topic to be a bit vague. I seem to always get confused and lack confidence when I have to deal with a conditional relationship in an argument because I just take the Premises of the argument to mean the Sufficient Condition and the Conclusion of the argument to mean the Necessary Condition. If someone can please clarify it for me or correct my understanding of this it would be much appreciated.

Also I have been having some difficulty with knowing when exactly to diagram Lawgic. Are we only supposed to diagram when we see words from Group 1-4 of the Sufficient and Necessary Condition indicators?

General Structure of Conditional Statements: Sufficient Condition --> Necessary Condition

Sufficient Condition

Necessary Condition

Hello. Lately I have been having a lot of trouble with grasping what exactly I am supposed to be doing with Weaken and Strengthen Questions. I understand that the basic concept is to find an answer choice that will either weaken or strengthen the existing support structure provided in the Stimulus or more it less or more relevant but despite this I find myself having trouble with finding the correct answer.

Because we have to treat what is said in the answer choices as true what does that mean for the assumptions that you can draw from the answer choices? Are we even supposed to be making any assumptions from the answer choices when doing this and if so do they also hold true? Or is the truth of these assumptions from the answer choice dependent on something else like the information and context provided by the Stimulus? Should we even be making any assumptions at all when it comes to the AC?! Also do we treat all the information in the Stim as true as well?

To make my question a bit more clear I will be using Question 15 from "Weaken Questions Problem Set 5" as an example.

Admin note: Please review the forum rules.

4. Do not post LSAT questions, any copyrighted content, or links to content that infringe on copyright.

PT25.S2.Q15: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-2-question-15/

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the reasoning above?

Answer Choices (With my Reasoning Below)

A.) Admin note: Deleted

X = I picked this answer choice (but it turned out to be incorrect) because I thought that the argument above assumed that it was only temperature that is capable of causing rhododendrons (R) and crocus (C) to blossom. If it was to some other factor which this AC seems to hint at then wouldn’t it weaken the authors argument that because of the observed incident it can be concluded that it would indicate something about the temperature.

B) Admin note: Deleted

X = The subject of this AC is what many people think about being outdoors which is irrelevant and thus does nothing to weaken the argument above.

C) Admin note: Deleted

X = I feel that this would strengthen the argument because if it is also favorable then it is more likely for this incidence to be indicative of the accuracy of a thermometer reading.

D) Admin note: Deleted

Correct AC = This is my problem with this AC. It says that R “CAN” grow 12 feet tall. Are we supposed to draw an assumption that the R plant in the Stim is infact 12 feet tall. “Can” seems to indicate only a possibility but it doesn’t guarantee anything so then I thought that because we had to draw a assumption that this wouldn’t be a strong enough AC to weaken. Also the phrase “is likely” doesn’t guarantee us anything either, it just indicates an increased chance but not something I would consider to be 100%. That 1% that the air temperature might not differ could possibly lead this AC to be useless in weakening. So I am confused as to how much we can assume to make an AC fit with either strengthen or weaken.

E) Admin note: Deleted

X = Seems irrelevant to me although it has the possibility to weaken if the assumption that the author was using this specific thermometer + would have to assume that he is not working in modern temperature range + also would have to assume that he is observing this phenomenon where the thermometer would be less accurate. So too many assumptions that we are not guaranteed of.

Hello all! I hope everyone is having a great weekend so far and managed to take some time away from studying because I for one am still recovering from my first Friday night R&R in months. I am curious as to how you all approach the 7Sage Core Curriculum? Personally I am a rather slow and methodical learner that is just so fixated on excessive note taking and the details that I basically move through the 7Sage course at a abysmally slow glacial speed. Honestly after assessing how I was studying I felt that this slow speed that I move at and basically writing down everything that JY says and trying to memorize it as the word of a venerable God Emperor I seem to almost forget some of the lessons learned previously. I watch every video and basically comb through the comments in the videos to pick out some worthwhile tips but, as I said before, I fear that I may not be grasping the bigger and more important concepts forsaking it for the details of an individual question instead.

I have began to set aside days where I plan to only review and compile important information whether it be concepts, rules, or important takeaways from certain problems onto a Word Document so that I may more effectively review past lessons in a more concise manner as well as drilling certain problematic problem sets that I just failed miserably in while balancing it out with days where I devote all my time to moving forward with the video lessons.

Just some information I am studying for the LSAT full time and I plan to take it sometime in 2019 so that I can apply the upcoming cycle. I initially had planned to take it in January but due to an injury I had to take a significant amount of time off to basically heal and return to 100%.

I was wondering if anyone could be so kind as to give me some tips or tricks as to what worked for you because I would love to learn how to more effectively study and manage my time so that I do not get so bogged down that I end up barely ready for test day. Thank you all so much!

Hi all!

I just have a question regrading And + Or in the SC and NC and what happens when you Satisfy the SC through Valid Argument Form #1 and Deny the NC through Valid Argument Form #2. Here is where my thinking is at right now if any of you can correct me please do!!

Or in the Sufficient Condition

Valid Argument Form #1: Satisfying the Sufficient Condition

A or B --> C

Because it is an or statement there are three ways that can you can possibly satisfy the Sufficient Condition and conclude C.

Valid Argument Form #2: Denying the Necessary Condition

A or B --> C

When you deny the Necessary Condition by saying /C you can end up with 3 possibilities.

And in the Necessary Condition

Valid Argument Form #2: Denying the Sufficient Condition

A --> B and C

When you say /B and /C you conclude /A because B and C are jointly necessary they must both be denied.

LR Question Referring To: PT#J07 S#3 Q#17 (Exercising muscles in one back...)

Hey all! Hope all is well, I just have a question about how to properly analyze conditionals in Premises, Sub-Conclusions, and Conclusions? Right now I noticed that my understanding has been pretty lacking and I am not sure if I am steering myself in the right direction or not. If someone could perhaps correct my reasoning or approach that would be very much appreciated.

Premises

Proper Alignment ----> Muscles Opposite Sides Pull Equally

Sub Conclusion

Maintaining a Healthy Back ----> Balanced Muscle Development

Conclusion

Maintaining a Healthy Back ---> Exercise Muscles on Opposite Sides Equally

So upon reading @Sami wonderful explanation here (https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/9561/pt-june-2007-s3-q17-when-excercising-the-muscles) I saw that she identified a gap between the PA and MHB. While I was pouring over the relationship between the two I, perhaps falsely assumed, that Maintaining a Healthy Back ---> Proper Alignment because after considering the Negation of it being Maintaining a Healthy Back and /Proper Alignment I reasoned that Proper Alignment was a Necessary component for Maintaining a Healthy Back...

...and while I am writing this I feel like I am making assumption upon assumption :X because right this very second I am considering whether there are varying degrees of Proper Alignment, what the hell is even this Proper Alignment, what defines Proper Alignment, would 1% of a Improper Alignment be prevent ones back from being thrown into the category of Proper Alignment?! Anyways,

because should /Proper Alignment be the case it seems hard pressed for me to say that one could claim that they are Maintaining a Healthy Back. So upon reasoning or screwing myself over I saw that because Maintaining a Healthy Back ---> Proper Alignment I could connect up the Conditional in the Premises to the Sub Conclusion to get

Premises

Conclusion

So from the Premises I inferred that Muscles Opposite Sides Pull Equally and Balanced Muscle Development because they were both now connected to Maintaining a Healthy Back. So I guess with that I just equated the two ideas (I am honestly not even sure if you can do that...) and just went off looking for something that would connect either Muscles Opposite Sides Pull Equally or Balanced Muscle Development to Exercise Muscles on Opposite Sides Equally because it seemed to be the only gap remaining.

So then I read @Sami explanation again and under her explanation for Answer Choice: A she says...

" we know that there is a relationship between balanced muscle developed and proper alignment of back, but does the stimulus say that having a balanced muscle development is sufficient/enough to guarantee the proper back alignment? No, its says its needed but does not guarantee that it would lead to a proper back alignment. Other things can also despite having a balanced muscle development could lead someone not to have the proper alignment of back."

And now I am even more lost because I fail to see how the Stimulus says that Balanced Muscle Development is Necessary for Proper Alignment. It seems like all the Premises is doing is just explaining with the conditional (Proper Alignment ----> Muscles Opposite Sides Pull Equally) why the conditional in the Sub Conclusion is the case being (Maintaining a Healthy Back ----> Balanced Muscle Development). If we take what is contained in the Premises to be true and only question the support then wouldn't the already established connection Sami mentioned, Proper Alignment --> Balanced Muscle Development, already connect the Premises to the Sub-Conclusion because it would just be...

Premises

Maintaining a Healthy Back ---> Proper Alignment ----> Muscles Opposite Sides Pull Equally

Conclusion

Maintaining a Healthy Back ---> Exercise Muscles on Opposite Sides Equally

because if we accept the Premises as true cant we chain up the other conditions associated with it which would basically mean that the first gap mentioned by Sami being between Proper Alignment and Maintaining a Healthy Back is essentially nonexistent?

My apologies for the long post I am just concerned with how I feel like I arrived at the correct answer with some fucking bizarre reasoning that I cant even fully comprehend. Any help or clarification would be very much appreciated! Thanks again. I need a damn drink.

"Jack must be diligent and smart because without these traits he is doomed to fail"

Meaning: If Jack is not diligent or smart then it guarantees he will fail.

As this is a OR statement Jack can be the following below to trigger him Failing

Meaning: If Jack doesn't fail then he must be both Diligent and Smart.

I have been trying to make up more difficult sentences to diagram into lawgic to help my understanding but have been a bit confused with this. Would really appreciate it if someone can correct me if I have messed up in anyway thank you so much in advance!