Hi all, I have been tracking necessary questions for about two weeks. I was on a roll getting 5/5’s from the syllabus course and now the questions are getting harder and harder and I’m not quite able to negate as fast, nor do I understand what I am negating half the time or how I come up with the right answer for these harder questions. I’m going to be honest, it’s the stimulus that I flat out don’t understand sometimes and I always eliminate down to two answer choices and choose the wrong one still (again choosing the wrong one because I can’t negate very well). I always blind review and watch the explanation videos but it’s always until after does it make sense. I can’t seem to make this jump on my own. 2 weeks ago, weaken questions were my worst and I drilled and drilled and now I get them all right, but these necessary assumption ones are the death of me. Can someone try to dumb it down for me since obviously I can’t get it? Thank you, I am not a quitter but I am getting really discouraged on this particular question type.

Hi 7-sagers,

I am planning to take the august lsat and aiming for 171+

My current stats by section:

LR -3 to -1

LG -1 to 0

RC -11 to -4

My average LSAT score is 168, currently taking one pt every 3days. Is it possible to improve my RC and bring my average up to 171+ In a month?

What are some good advices/materials for RC?

Thank you!!!!

So I picked A in both the first run and the blind review. I'm thinking the reason it's wrong is that the action did not cause harm and the prompt explicitly states morally bad actions cause harm. I considered E in the blind review but ruled it out because I wanted to be right about A and thought he could not have foreseen the kid being hit by a bike. But of course, when you're watching a kid that's why you want to keep them out of the street--so they don't get hit by anything.

Hi everyone,

Was curious to know if anyone has tried Ellen Cassidy's method of the translation and CLIR and if they've found success with it? Also, how did you implement it in your prep AND practice tests? Appreciate it!

Hi all!

I feel like people often make a distinction between recent PTs that are available and older tests which some would say are less difficult. My question is: what counts as one of these recent tests? Is it anything after PT70? PT80? I would like to make sure to save those for when things get "real".

I was reviewing a question I have seen many, many... many times over. PT40.S1.14 for anyone interested.

Today as I was analyzing the stimulus, my pre-phrase for the flaw was that it was the classic argument from ignorance fallacy (an assertion that a claim is either true or false because of a lack of evidence to the contrary; aka "you didn't disprove/prove this, so you're wrong/I'm right"). This is an informal logical fallacy.

I went to the answer choices and liked C the best. It reads, "The argument takes for granted that if the truth of one claim implies the truth of a second claim, then the falsity of the first claim proves that falsity of the second claim." I thought this wasn't written exactly as I had in mind, but it described the flaw in formal logic. The even more classic sufficient/necessary mix-up/incorrect negation/incorrect reversal (all of these describe the same formal error). Oldest trick in the book. And then the lightbulb in my brain went off.

Answer choice C is saying the argument assumed that if A --> B, then /A proves /B. Isn't this very similar to that argument from ignorance fallacy? You didn't prove A to me (you presented /A), so your claim about B is wrong (/B).

Basically, the sufficient/necessary flaw is the formal logic mirror to the informal argument from ignorance fallacy. The former requires a tight argument structure, while the latter is more flexible with looser language. In essence, however, they are the same error. Until now, I had kept formal and informal logic as separate and unrelated, but they actually overlap. And this is exactly how the test writers will disguise/describe the same flaws in different ways-- not just in the stimuli but in answer choices as well. 🤯

Thinking about the contrapositives is also interesting. The formal logic error of an incorrect reversal is pretty obvious: B --> A. But if we consider the "expressed contrapositive" (in quotes because I just made up this term and don't think there is such a thing in informal logic), then it's something like, "Your conclusion about B is not wrong, so you proved A." Your conclusion exists, so your premises are proven? Lol, wtf? No wonder these are logical fallacies.

Anyway, maybe I'm slow and everyone already knew this, lol. It was an a-ha moment for me so I wanted to write it out. If I have made a mistake, someone please correct me. If you have other realizations about the flaws/fallacies/question types, please share as well!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-40-section-1-question-14/

RC is my weak section. I am retaking in August so im focusing heavy on it. I am using a new strategy (I was just flat out reading before, forgetting everything and getting lost). This strategy is working, I got -4 compared to -11 on a section. But im doing it untimed to make sure I do it properly.... any suggestions on how to slowly transition this into timed sections by the August test?

On Wednesday, July 21 at 9pm ET / 6pm PT, join 7Sage Admissions Consultants and professional writers for a discussion on brainstorming topics and structuring written statements for law school applications. There will be time reserved for a Q&A.

If you have a Clubhouse account, use this link to RSVP and join Club 7Sage: https://www.joinclubhouse.com/event/mWLdKbaY.

If you do not currently have Clubhouse access, or are on the Clubhouse waitlist, the first 1,000 people to use this link (https://www.clubhouse.com/join/club-7sage/VBf1USJG/mWLdKbaY) will be able to skip the Clubhouse waitlist for access to the platform, RSVP for our event, and join Club 7Sage. Unfortunately, we cannot provide additional access beyond the first 1,000 people. We will record the session for those unable to attend and post it to our podcast, which is available via Apple and Spotify.

We hope to see you on Clubhouse!

On Wednesday, July 14 at 9pm ET / 6pm PT, join 7Sage Consultants for a full hour of Q&A. Ask previous admissions officers about applications, written statements, timing, strategy, addenda, and/or splitter scenarios.

If you have a Clubhouse account, use this link to RSVP and join Club 7Sage: https://www.joinclubhouse.com/event/myo56gjV.

If you do not currently have Clubhouse access, or are on the Clubhouse waitlist, the first 1,000 people to use this link (https://www.clubhouse.com/join/club-7sage/RF9Xur4Q/myo56gjV) will be able to skip the Clubhouse waitlist for access to the platform, RSVP for our event, and join Club 7Sage. Unfortunately, we cannot provide additional access beyond the first 1,000 people. We will record the session for those unable to attend and post it to our podcast, which is available via Apple and Spotify.

We hope to see you on Clubhouse!

Hi everyone,

I wanted to write this because I felt it important to demonstrate that with hard work and dedication, this test IS learnable. I still have a long way to go but don't give up, I have seen a few posts in the last couple of days about a member not feeling like they have seen any improvement, or just struggling with the test, I am here to say that is possible with hard work. I am an older student (mid 30s) with a family, work, school full time and it CAN be done. Do not give up, if you are struggling rewatch the CC or hire a tutor if needed. I started to actively study end of May, my score was a whopping 146, my test today after a month and a week, 161. I was so defeated and still am at times but I have seen a huge improvement in the month that I've been studying. I have attached screenshots of the first test and one that I just finished now.

I want to thank this community, although I am not one to post, I am always reading and appreciative of the support and advice shared.

Goodluck to everyone taking their tests soon and a big congratulations to those who already took it.

-Cynthia

https://i.imgur.com/M5Tdpqp.png

https://i.imgur.com/j4YcxbA.png

.

Hey everyone,

I've done a couple of PT's so far and am trying to improve on the question types the test analytics have pointed out to prioritize. However, I'm not seeing much improvement. I'm doing problem sets of the types and reviewing the strategies behind each but to no avail I'm still not improving. Within a PT, specifically with LR sections, I may get -3 and on other I get -10, and sometimes even -10 on both. I truly don't know what to do and where I'm going wrong. I've even started writing out why each answer is right and others are wrong lately.

I truly would like to get to the point where LR isn't so varied for me. Any advice on how to get there, especially when getting to -3 and -4 is possible for me, would be greatly appreciated.

My LR scores for PT's 70- 77 have been for section 2/ section 3:

70 -3/-6

71 -13/-8

72 -4/-8

73 -7/-14

74 -8/-4

75 -6/ -10

76 -10/-5

77 -10/-10

Hi, Im about to take my second LSAT this august. I was wondering when I should have all my applications pretty much finished?

I've been grinding on RC for the longest time but I just can't ever seem to hit the supposed "Target Times" for each of the passages.

Sometimes I get 100% accuracy but I finish a passage in 9 minutes when the target time says 7 minutes. Or I finish an 8-question, really difficult science passage in 11 minutes but target time says 9 minutes.

Anyone else find that discouraging? Accuracy has gotten significantly higher but I just can't ever reach those target times listed out. It makes me wonder if I need to change my process up or something.

What do people think?

Reviving this excellent resource so we can add to it and keep it alive. Credit to @alyhobbs and the 3 years ago crew. Hope you all are killing it wherever you are.

Original thread: https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/16979/help-with-flaw-type-examples

Will be adding to this but hey, don't make me do all the work... please post your examples up (especially for unaddressed categories) and I'll add them to the OP. It would be sweet if you copied the general format that follows too so I can just copy and paste. I'll credit you and you can be immortalized in the sage archives for all time.

Future 7sagers: please do continue to do this... copy what follows and make it your own. Please credit the original poster below and carry the flame.

@alyhobbs wrote:

Hey everyone, I am having a hard time with Flaw Questions. I know we are supposed to memorize the common argument flaws but that is where my struggle is. I am very much a visual/example type of learner. When going through the flaw types I realized it would really help me to understand and memorize them if I had examples. So I have been going through PTs and Drills that I have done trying to match them up with the flaw types and could use some help. Some I am able to easily match up to the type of flaw and others I am not. I have listed the different types below, some have specific question examples and then underneath I have a list of questions I need help matching. If anyone knows of any specific PT questions that match up with the other flaws please let me know so I can add them to my list. I hope this can also help others that struggle with flaws.

Flaw Types with Example Questions

1) Attacking the source of the argument

PT19S2Q14 *Thanks keets993

"rejects a claim by attacking the proponents of the claim rather than addressing the claim itself"

PT25S4Q04 *Thanks keets993

"assails legislation on the basis of the questionable character of supporters of the legislation"

PT39S4Q11 *Thanks keets993

"diverts attention from the content of the article by focusing on the writers' actions"

2) Uses terms unclearly/equivocation

PT25S04Q17

"The argument ambiguously uses the word "afford""

PT53S1Q12 *Thanks keets993

"ambiguity of risk"

PT59S2Q15 *canihazJD

"the meaning of a key term shifts illicitly during the course of the argument"

PT22S2Q24 *Thanks keets993

"draws a conclusion based on equivocal language"

3) Analogies that really aren’t analogous enough

"It relies on an analogy between two things that are insufficiently alike in the respects in which they would have to be alike for the conclusion to be supported"

4) Appealing to authority in an area outside their expertise

PTJ07S2Q17 @WickedLost @"Granger Danger"

"The argument relies on the testimony of experts whose expertise is not shown to be sufficiently broad to support their general claim"

PT20S4Q20 @"Granger Danger"

Parallel flaw with classic appeal fallacy.

5) Causation confusions

PT47S3Q23

“It takes for granted that if a correlation has been observed between two phenomena, they must be causally connected”

PT30S2Q25 *Thanks keets993

"because hormone levels are correlated with heart disease they influence heart disease"

PT47S1Q23 *Thanks keets993

"ignores the possibility that an increase in theta waves may not always be accompanied by a state of profound creativity"

PT18S4Q9 *Thanks keets993

"It mistakes a correlation between the type of brain damage described and Parkinson's disease for a causal relation between the two"

PT39S4Q20 *Thanks keets993

"overlooks the possibility that the same thing may causally contribute both to education and to good health"

PT20S1Q10 *Thanks akistotle

"ignores the possibility that drivers who drive recklessly have a preference for red cars"

PT20S4Q14 *Thanks akistotle

"It concludes that one thing was caused by another although the evidecnce given is consistent with the first thing's having caused the second"

PT30S2Q25 *Thanks akistotle

"Because hormone levels are correlated with heart disease they influence heart disease"

PT31S2Q9 *Thanks akistotle

"offers no evidence that the individuals queried would have responded differently had they been asked the same questions in years prior to the survey"

PT64S1Q5 *Thanks akistotle

"dogs' misbehavior is the cause of, rather than the result of, frequent discipline"

PT65S1Q8 *Thanks akistotle

"illicitly infers a cause from a correlation"

PT66S4Q25 *Thanks akistotle

"foods containing fiber also contain other substances that, when consumed, tend to prevent colon cancer"

PT89S4Q15 *canihazJD

“surmises from the fact that two phenomena are correlated that one causes the other”

6) Circular Reasoning

PT17S2Q2 *Thanks keets993 and akistotle

"draws a conclusion that simply restates a claim given in support of that conclusion"

PT17S3Q20 *Thanks keets993 and akistotle

"assumes what it sets out to conclude"

PT6S3Q8 *Thanks akistotle

"It assumes what it seeks to establish"

PT24S2Q8 *Thanks akistotle

"presupposes the truth of the conclusion it is attempting to establish"

PT49S2Q23 *Thanks akistotle

"The purported evidence that it cites in support of its conclusion presumes that the conclusion is true"

7) Confusing necessary and sufficient conditions

PT63 S1 Q25

“infers that something that is sufficient to provide a motive is necessary to provide a motive”

PT22S2Q25 *Thanks keets993

"confuses a sufficient condition with a required condition"

PT17S2Q11 *Thanks keets993 and akistotle

"It mistakenly interprets P to be claiming that a factor assures, rather than is necessary for, a legislator's effectiveness"

PT17S3Q9 *Thanks keets993

"does not establish that only a bird could have made the track"

PT18S4Q3 *Thanks keets993

"Grass seeds will not germinate well unless they are pressed firmly into the ground. The grass seeds sown in this yard were pressed firmly into the ground, so they will germinate well"

PT22S4Q21 *Thanks akistotle

"presupposing that if an action's having a certain property is necessary for its being a certain type of action, then having that property is sufficient for being that type of action"

PT23S2Q19 *Thanks akistotle

"taking the nonexistence of something as evidence that a necessary precondition for that thing also did not exist"

PT23S3Q17 *Thanks akistotle

"mistakes being sufficient to justify punishment for being required to justify it"

PT24S2Q23 *Thanks akistotle

"From the assertion that something is necessary to a moral order, the argument concludes that that thing is sufficient for an element of the moral order to be realized"

PT30S4Q14 *Thanks akistotle

"It mistakes something that is necessary for its conclusion to follow for something that ensures that the conclusion follows"

PTJ07S3Q25 *Thanks akistotle

"confuses a condition's being required for a given result to occur in one case with the condition's being sufficient for such a result to occur in a similar case"

PT64S1Q24 *Thanks akistotle

"confuses a claim that under certain conditions a certain action should be taken with a claim that the action need not be taken in the absence of those conditions"

PT67S2Q09 *Thanks akistotle

"treats a statement whose truth is required for the conclusion to be true as though it were a statement whose truth ensures that the conclusion is true"

PT68S3Q21 *Thanks akistotle

"takes for granted that the speech could not be inappropriate if it was not inflammatory"

PT89S4Q20 *canihazJD

"mistakes necessary conditions for sufficient condition"

8) False dichotomy

PT22S4Q09 *Thanks keets993

"treats two things, neither one of which can plausibly be seen as excluding the other, as though they were mutually exclusive"

PT38S1Q11 (Thanks to @"Slow is Fast" for finding it!) @"Burden.of.Floof"

"fails to consider that some students may be neither fascinated by nor completely indifferent"

PT39S4Q26 *Thanks keets993

"Since there is a storm moving in, the outside temperature cannot rise this afternoon. Therefore, it must fall."

PT59S3Q20 @cldennis94

9) Confusing probability for certainty

"It takes for granted that the economic incentive to construct colonies on the Moon will grow sufficiently to cause such a costly project to be undertaken."

10) Confusing "is" for "ought"

PT60S3Q16 *thanks @"cole.davis10"

"Takes for granted that preserving a currently endangered species in a habitat does not have higher priority than preserving species in that habitat that are not endangered"

11) Percentages v. quantity

"Far more pedestrians cross at corners than jaywalk"

12) Surveys and samplings to reach a general conclusion

PT 63S1Q3

“It relies on the opinions of a group unlikely to be representative of the group at issue in the conclusion”

PT51S1Q4

“fails to state the number of dermatologists surveyed, which leaves open the possibility that the sample of doctors is too small to be reliable”

PT31S2Q03 *Thanks keets993

"Those who are best able to provide answers to the question are patients, rather than physicians"

PT39S4Q21 *Thanks keets993

"that there may be few if any other plumbers working in Moore's town"

13) Hasty generalization

PT51S3Q6

“draws a generalization that is broader than is warranted by the findings cited”

PT30S2Q13 *Thanks samantha.ashley92

"Treats a claim about what is currently the case as if it were a claim about what has been the case for an extended period"

PT39S2Q2 *Thanks samantha.ashley92

“draws a conclusion about all cases of a certain kind on the basis of evidence that justifies such a conclusion only about some cases of that kind”

PT18S4Q25 *Thanks keets993

"He attempts to refute a general claim by reference to nonconforming cases, although the claim is consistent with the occurrence of such cases"

14) Experiments to reach a general conclusion

"playing the study's card game perfectly requires fairly low levels of perception and memory"

15) Your argument fails therefore the opposite of your conclusion must be true

PT47S1Q8

“takes for granted that the fact that a claim has not been demonstrated to be false establishes that it is true”

PT51S1Q15 *Thanks samantha.ashley92

“the argument, in its attempt to refute one theory of species classification, presupposes the truth of an opposing theory

16) Relative v. absolute

PT 53S1Q22 *Thanks keets993

"mistakes a merely relative property for one that is absolute"

PT 85S3Q24

"takes for granted that there are not significantly more households with a dog than ones with a cat"

17) Confusing one possible solution for the only solution

PT30S4Q6 *Thanks samantha.ashley92

"Confuses being an adequate solution with being a required solution"

PT59S2Q8 *canihazJD

"fails to consider alternative explanations of the decline in sales of ice cream"

18) Red herring

PT26S2Q11

"it appeals to the emotion of pity rather than addressing the issue raised"

PT18S4Q11 *Thanks keets993

"relies on an irrelevant reason for rejecting the civil libertarian's argument"

PT18S2Q04 *Thanks keets993

"He argues against a point that is not one that Marianna was making"

19) Tradition fallacy and novelty fallacy

“fails to show that a certain conclusion of the recent report is better justified than an opposing conclusion reached in older studies”

20) Confusing part v. whole

PT 47S3Q25 *Thanks keets993

"To put together this year's two All-Star Teams, the best players in the league were selected. Half of them were put on Team One, and half were put on Team Two. Since each player on the two teams was one of the best players in the league this year, it follows that the two All-Star Teams are the two best teams this year."

I also describe this is as 'falsey transfers attributes that can't be transferred' *Thanks keets993

PT17S3Q19 *Thanks keets993

"Of all the flowers grown in the university's botanical garden, the Oakland roses are the most beautiful. Since the university's botanical garden is the most beautiful . Since the university's botanical garden is the most beautiful garden in the region, the Oakland roses grown in the garden must be the most beautiful flowers grown in the entire region."

PT17S3Q16 *Thanks keets993

"assuming that because something is true each of the parts of a whole it is true of the whole itself"

PT62S2Q7 *Thanks LCMama2017

"This paragraph is long. So the sentences that comprise it are long."

PT87S3Q7 *canihazJD

"infers that a food will have a certain property simply because one of the foods ingredients has that property"

21) Beliefs v. facts

PT 80.S1.Q19 @cldennis94

"opposing higher taxes is not a factor contributing to good leadership."

Note: a Weaken question, but belief vs. facts is the flaw here in the argument.

PT 28.S1.Q19 @cldennis94

"infers that something is the case because it is believed to be the case."

22) Relies on people's opinions as fact

PT28S1Q09 *Thanks keets993

"a claim is inferred to be false merely because a majority of people believe it to be false"

Match the flaw

PT47S1Q23

“ignores the possibility that an increase in theta waves may not always be accompanied by a state of profound creativity”

PT51S1Q6

“It fails to take into account that what brings someone happiness at one moment may not bring that person happiness at another time”

PT51S1Q18

“overlooks the possibility that most people may have voted for small cities even though a large city received more votes than any other single city”

PT51S3Q4

“fails to consider that the total amount of money spent on education may be much greater than the total spent on sports”

PT51S3Q9

“fails to consider the possibility that the vehicle related fatality rates in other areas are also rising”

PT67S2Q9

"treats a statement whose truth is required for the conclusion to be true as though it were a statement whose truth ensures that the conclusion is true"

PT67S2Q21

"the argument fails to consider that bees might be present even in the absence of a particular condition that would ensure their presence"

More added by @samantha.ashley92

PT30S4Q8: "The argument presumes that no other evidence is relevant to the issue at hand"

Relative v. absolute? I have no idea.

PT30S4Q14: "It mistakes something that is necessary for its conclusion to follow for something that ensures that the conclusion follows"

23) Unrepresentative sample

PTM20S3Q18 *canihazJD

"making a generalization on the basis of a sample that is likely to be unrepresentative"

PT88S4Q19 *canihazJD

"draws a conclusion on the basis of a biased sample"

24) Sneaking something in (dont have a good name/category for this yet).

Hi friends!

I am looking for a study buddy to go over a PT together on the weekends. I scored a 170 on the June LSAT Flex and ideally would like to score a 175+ on the August test. I also do things differently where I like going over the test after blind reviewing and before scoring so that we can get the full mileage out of each test.

I am very flexible with time!

If interested, please pm me and we can maybe get some review sessions set up!

Hi there: I feel like I have been playing scenarios back and forth in my head too much, so I figured I would pose this question to the 7sage community: should I delay my application for a year?

I just took the LSAT for the first time in June and was very pleasantly surprised to receive a 169. While I had scored 168 several times leading up to the test, this score was above my PT average (between 165-166). It also represents a 22 point increase from my diagnostic of 147. A large part of my progress came from taking working on 7sage, so a huge shout out for that!

With a score that is teetering right on the edge of elite, I am now wondering whether it’s worth it to just go ahead and apply now, or put off applying for a year, spend a lot of time digging in, and try to get a score in the mid 170s. Here’s my context:

Because of my personal situation, I am really only able to choose between schools in Boston. This puts me in a tight spot of having to either chase down Harvard or settle with BU or BC. Don’t get me wrong, both BU and BC are excellent options and certainly have some notable benefits for me. But Harvard is, and has been, the dream.

Unfortunately, I have a fairly low GPA for Harvard (3.77) but the degree was in Chemistry. I also have a Masters’s from the University of Cambridge (with high marks) and two years of work experience in leadership positions in my field of interest.

I currently work full time and don’t think I could effectively balance studying really hard for the LSAT while also putting together a top-notch application that could go in early. This kind of leaves me with two options: 1) Take a chance and see whether I am one of the outliers and get into Harvard with a 169 or 2) Delay for a year, continue to bust my ass on the LSAT, and apply next year with (hopefully) a score that is closer to their median.

One BIG question for me in this is: Is Harvard a realistic option? If I end up delaying and get, say, a 173, will Harvard be viable, particularly given my lower GPA? Or will I sort of end up in the same spot that I was before, which is pretty great, but not quite enough?

I would love any thoughts, comments and advice!

I have an LSAT score from June 2016. I thought it would of expired by June 2021...anyone have any insight on this?

Hey guys, is the August test going to be 3 sections scored and 1 section experimental now? Are you practicing with the 4 sections test? How are you scoring it?

I have been studying consistently for about 5 hours a day, 5/6 days a week and I am seeing no improvement. I took a PT and my score was exactly the same (144) as my first diagnostic test. My goal is to score 164. I have a study schedule of 5 months and feel very discouraged that I am seeing no improvement 2 months in. I don't know what I should be doing differently in order to start seeing improvements in my score. Any help/advice welcomed :)

Hello fellow students,

I apologize for the vague nature of my question, but I am issuing this post in search of any possible tips, advice, etc.

I have been studying the LSAT (predominantly on 7sage) for the past 2-3 months. On my practice exams my average LG score is -1 and LR score is -4. These are noticeable improvements from when I first began this summer, and more importantly these scores satisfy my target/goal.

However, when it comes to RC it is very difficult to see steady improvement. My average score on a RC is -8 with scores ranging from -4 all the way to a disastrous -14. Despite seeing consistent improvement in other sections, my RC score is as much of a toss-up as it was on day 1.

I have watched the majority of the curriculum regarding RC questions and (to the best of my ability) attempt to utilize low resolution summaries, however I am still stuck.

I was wondering if anyone else had a similar struggle and has found a way to overcome such an issue through different study methods, tips during the reading of passages, etc.

Any input would be greatly appreciated :)

I keep getting these wrong and it's up and very dark red in my Analytics. Any help/anyone who knows where in the syllabus I can go to to cover it again is super appreciated!

hi, how are you simulating this test? are you guys taking 4 sections and scoring all 4 sections. And are you guys alternating the 4th section between LR, LG and RC?

I understand bi-conditionals, advanced logic, etc. I always get thrown off when I have to make multiple boards in In/Out Games. Can anyone give me some advice on when to make multiple boards and how many boards to make? Are there any words I should be looking out for?

[I am posting on behalf of 7Sage user. Please feel free to leave your comments below. Thank you for your help!]

Hi! I am working through LG and I'm having issues with "not both" "or" and biconditionals, particularly in the wording of game rules. Is there a list of common game rules that imply "not both"? A list of common game rules that imply the never apart biconditional?