Hi, jsut wondering...
If conditional statements include "probably" or prediction, can we make it contrapositive?
Eg...A→B,
prob not A→Prob not B,
Contrapositive: Prob B→Prob A. Is this allowed? Can we call this as illegal reversal of the original A→B?
Thank you
Hi,
I was not sure about E...the language is so confusing.
How should I understand the answer choice and why is it wrong?
Thanks in advance!
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-2-question-11/
Thanks for reply,
but...I think I'm still confused.
First of all...What does interbreed mean? I'm afraid that I misunderstood what it means...
I thought it means different species make descendant...so it's apparantly truee the two species are totally different.
So I thought it's no need to mention Neandeltal in answer C.
Or in your explanation > Answer C eliminates the potential objection that maybe the DNA of homo sapiens was closer to that of Neanderthals, so even if a modern human wouldn't be able to interbreed with a Neanderthal, a homo sapiens still could.
I just don't understand why it is "required" to compare how much differences they have between the ancestor to N and ancestor to humans.
Sorry if my question does not make sense...I'm so confused with this question and also not sure about what I wanna ask either :(
Hi,
So I'm not sure about the correct answer C...
Why do we have to assume or compare the ancestors to Neanderthals? Why it's required?
Even though we know homo sapiens ancestors of contemporary humans was not significantly more similar to that of Neanderthals than is the DNA of people today, that only means people today was more similar to Homo sapiens when we compared to Neanderthals.
It could be true there are some similarities between ppl and Neanderthals, just not as much as with homo sapiense.
In that case, we cannot conclude homo sapiens did not interbred with Neanderthals (and it could be true both neanderthals and homo sapiens were ancestors of humans).
I'm really confused with C and do not understand why it's required to make the conclusion in the argument (which is they did not "interbreed")
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-63-section-1-question-19/
I see...thanks.
By the way, it says "In addition" in the stimuli, does it mean the 1st conditional statement (principle) is added to the sufficient part of the second conditional statement (principle)? So, the 2 principles are actually combined and there is one big principle. or there are just 2 separate conditional statements? Did I think too much about the "in additiona" part?
Hi, I'm not sure why D is wrong and B is correct...
since it says there was reasonable grounds...etc I thought it follows the conditional statement and it's justified.
Any ideas why D is wrong ? :(
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-3-question-18/
hi,
I dont understand why E is wrong...it says the citys mayor requested so they invested in computermodeling technology right?
if the mayor was not a proponet they would not request it...I thought. any ideas? :(
Is it bc of the part *because of* ? so we dont know if its because of that reason mentioned in E...but could be other reasons?
thank you in advance.
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-64-section-1-question-18/
Is E wrong because it is not about purpose and it also does not talk about whether it is "indifferent" ?
thanks in advnce.
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-65-section-1-question-15/
Thanks, can I ask what the tried and true method is?
Are "pharmacological intervention in the brain's neurochemistry" and"chemical changes in the brain" meaning the same thing? They are interchangeable? Otherwise I don't understand why the answer is B...
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-66-section-2-question-04/
gotcha, thanks
I mean the explanations...I already bpught PT 78.
Hi, I have a question...do you think you could start it ealier next time? I'd like to join the whole session, but I'm not sure I can think clearly until 3AM...do you have records somewhere?
Thanks,
So..this is not true for MAY or others right?
Thx, but I mean...can we print out the explanations? Or do you mean the explanations are all videos?
I have dry eyes and prefer to read in paper versions.
Besides the questions in the title...
What do you usually do during those days?
I took a couple of days off and sometimes I even needed 1 week or so to get refreshed...I feel like I take too many days off...
So I guess this is not PDF ver. explanations right?
Is the video part LG section? Or do you have other video explanations?
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-4-game-4/
I have a question about one of the rules...the rule says "S CAN be earlier than Q only if Q is third." I thought it is different from saying "S IS earlier than Q only if Q is third" so I thought S is not nec. to be earlier than Q or if we take the contrapositive of the rule, when Q is not third, we do not have to have Q-S.
But when I watched the video JY explained we actually treat it same as other rules that do not cantain CAN.
So we do not have to take it consideration? (the word "can")
Thanks for ur responses, would like to hear more from other Sep. testtakers or even Dec. test takers...where are you now? Drilling? or untimed PTs?
Thanks! :)
Hi, as the title says,
I'm just wondering, how many PTs do you still have to do if you want to take the Sept. test?
Did you already finish all of the PTs you want to finish and now are in only a reviewing stage, or do you still have fresh PTs you are going to do? How are you going to spend until Sept. test?
Just wondering because I saw someone said if you are not in the target score range now, Sept. test may not be the one you want to take...
Thanks,
Wait, I thought negation and contrapositive do not mean the same thing...is it?
I thought contrapositive involves conditional statement and negation is just...negating something.
Could you elaborate a bit why it's contrapositive and negation? Thanks!
Thanks for the reply---so term shift isn't important if one of them includes the other I guess? Is this true for every cases?
And just want to make sure...(A) is the negation of the premise and in this stimulus, the author only takes P as the only cause but (A) points out there can be other causes right?
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-3-question-16/
So I was not sure about the term switching..."the most important problems" in the conclusion and "important problems" in the premise. So I expected to see something related to that in the correct answer...but is this actually not an important switching?
And that's why I was not sure about the term "few important problems" in A...and thought B is correct because it contains "the most important problems."
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-3-question-20/
I was not sure between B and D.
I thought B is correct because it bases its conclusion on premise which contradicts one of its premise...
(It says "the odds are overwhelming that we would be alive during this period too" while also says "because we are not alive during this period")
Is B wrong because they are both premises and one of them is hypothesis?
By the way regarding D...isn't that "not alive during this period" seems true because how can ppl live so long? (It would take centuries right?) The question is not asking flaw in the argument, but I was just wondering whether the argument is valid or not.
Thanks,
Hi @, just wondering...
Are their explanations helpful?
Do you mean...Weakener and Strengthener are all premises?
So...the conclusion in that case is against the conclusion in the argument right?
But in that case how is it different from flaw? If we use it as aa premise and lead to a conclusion which is against the conclusion in the stimulus, wouldn't it mean the reasoning is flawed?
Okay...it's interesting because this kind of reasoning is "flaw" right? I saw a lot in flaw questions...
But it can be used as a weakener?
I think that's confused me...while it's flaw, it can be used as weakener?
Hi,
I was not sure about D at first because I thought what happened in the past may not be true always...what happened in the past cannot always apply to what would happen in the future.
Why it works as weakener?
Thanks.
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-78-section-3-question-26/
umm...thanks. I guess I have to think about this question a little more...
but thanks!