Self-study
Hey Everyone! I've only been studying for a few weeks and decided to apply what I learned from 7Sage about quantifiers to all/most/some practice problems in the LSAT Trainer. I'm stumped on one question and would very much appreciate it if someone would be able to map it out for me logically.
The passage is: "Most of the dishes at Oldie’s Diner are unhealthy, and most are offered on special during lunchtime. The dishes on special come with the customer’s choice of free fries or a free soda. All of the dishes offered on special are written up on the restaurant’s chalkboard."
The question is whether "Most of the dishes on the chalkboard are on special" can be true.
No matter how I go about the question using formal logic, I only ever arrive at some dishes written on the chalkboard are on special (Written-Chalkboard (--- s ---) On Special). Thanks in advance studious future attorneys!
I would recommend trying to match elements of the stimulus to elements in the answers, specifically conclusions, premises, and validity. For example if the stimulus has a prescriptive (should) conclusion or a probabilistic one like the question above, you can scan the answers and eliminate those that lack such conclusions. If the stimulus has two premises, you can scan to see which answers also have two premises. If the stimulus has an invalid form of reasoning, you can eliminate answers that have valid reasoning. Essentially, you are shallow dipping like JY teaches us, looking closely to see if certain elements in the answers match those in the stimulus, eliminating them if they don't. It's something I am trying to practice so that if I do spend any time actually working out answers deeply, it'll be at most two answer choices and not four or all five.