For question 1, I had an error based on the wording in the two premises. In P1, it says "electric trucks," and in P2, it says "trucks," which I infer as any kind. In the conclusion/explanation, it says this info is irrelevant, but I would examine trucks and electric trucks as inequivalent since one is a subset of the other. Maybe I am just confused. Can anyone explain why it is irrelevant to pay attention to the word "electric"?
1
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.
For question 1, I had an error based on the wording in the two premises. In P1, it says "electric trucks," and in P2, it says "trucks," which I infer as any kind. In the conclusion/explanation, it says this info is irrelevant, but I would examine trucks and electric trucks as inequivalent since one is a subset of the other. Maybe I am just confused. Can anyone explain why it is irrelevant to pay attention to the word "electric"?