does "many" include "2"?

youbbyun

For 60.3.6,

there seems to be a distinction between "2" and "many," which would make AC C wrong.

But I thought "many" is "some" and "some" includes "2"?

Where am I going wrong?

also, both AC C and D change subjects from premise to conclusion

For AC C, the subject changes from reviewers (who enjoyed the new novel) to a reviewer (in next Sunday's newspaper).

For AC D, the subject changes from reviewers (in general) to reviewer (for the local newspaper).

If someone could explain this problem to me and the differences for why C is wrong and D is right, that'll be greatly appreciated.

Thanks so much.

eRetaker

Hi @username_hello this is a case where the question states "most similar." I agree the structure is close but answer choice D is almost word for word the same as the stimulus (albeit with subject change). Answer choice C would work if D didn't exist as an option imo, but again the "most similar" part of the question makes D the correct answer. Also to your other point, many and some are equivalent and are both inclusive of "2," so you're right about that. In general, you should be following the path of least resistance for parallel reasoning questions.

AngusMcGillis

Merriam Webster defines many as "consisting of or amounting to a large but indefinite number", so without further clarification I don't think two counts as many.

Also C's conclusion seems a bit disjointed, in the premise The reviewers hoped, and in the conclusion it says the review express hope. I'm not sure these two things are the same, where in the stimulus, the sets in the premise and conclusion are very clearly the same.

Vibrio

For AC C, the subject changes from reviewers (who didn't hope Lo would write a sequel) to a review of the book (which probably will not express hope Lo would write a sequel).
There is a distinction here between the reviewers hoping (or not hoping) for something and whether a reviewer actually expresses hope in the review. (They may think/hope in a certain way but not write it in a review.)

For AC D, the subject is still a reviewer. Even though it qualifies this reviewer as one from "the local newspaper", this still parallels the argument in the sense that it's talking about the next reviewer/test pilot.

eRetaker

@AngusMcGillis yeah in real life "many" would mean more than two generally. Unfortunately in the lsat world, you can have 2 too many.

_oshun1_

Many = some = at least 1

eRetaker

Yep, it's a bit counter-intuitive but @"surfy surf" is correct.

AngusMcGillis

@eRetaker said:
@"surfy surf" is correct.

Yeah ofc, but in the stimulus many refers to an unknown amount and in AC C they refer to exactly 2, so you can't just conclude that those two statements are the same, just because many/some has an intersect with 2.

_oshun1_

I briefly skimmed the question and “many” and “two” have absolutely nothing to do with the stimulus or answers. the problem with ac C is that the subject of the premise and the subject of the conclusion are different and thus the premise doesn’t even relate to the conclusion. The premise says of the two reviewers who enjoyed the novel...while the stimulus refers to just a reviewer.

The stimulus just says “Pilots ->/found it difficult to operate.” Thus the pilot tomorrow prob won’t find it difficult. In this stimulus “many” may as well say all or just be omitted. Of the pilots who flew, none found it difficult.
@AngusMcGillis

eRetaker

@AngusMcGillis Yeah you make a good point, in this particular question the "many" isn't being exactly treated the same as the answer choice C. However the way I read the logic of the first sentence of the stimulus and answer choices C and D is that "All of X did not do action Y" since they're all logically equivalent once you convert the language from "none of many" and "neither of 2", which is what I'm assuming the OP did. The differences between C and D were simply that word for word, D was the most similar to the stimulus. Honestly, C would work in my opinion if you were picking without D as an option.

Also good eye @Vibrio , I did not notice that one on the first pass but that can definitely be another differentiating factor between C and D.

AngusMcGillis

@"surfy surf" said:
I briefly skimmed the question and “many” and “two” have absolutely nothing to do with the stimulus or answers. the problem with ac C is that the subject of the premise and the subject of the conclusion are different and thus the premise doesn’t follow from the conclusion. The premise says of the two reviewers who enjoyed the novel...while the stimulus refers to just a reviewer.

The stimulus just says “Pilots ->/found it difficult to operate.” Thus the pilot tomorrow prob won’t find it difficult. In this stimulus “many” may as well say all or just be omitted. Of the pilots who flew, none found it difficult.

Yeah if you check out my first post I said that P and C don't match the original, but I think the reason why OP made this post was that JY crosses out the AC based on the two and then proceeds to say that it's not enough to be many and he doesn't provide any other explanation. Hence the "many" debate
@"surfy surf"

_oshun1_

@AngusMcGillis said:

@"surfy surf" said:
I briefly skimmed the question and “many” and “two” have absolutely nothing to do with the stimulus or answers. the problem with ac C is that the subject of the premise and the subject of the conclusion are different and thus the premise doesn’t follow from the conclusion. The premise says of the two reviewers who enjoyed the novel...while the stimulus refers to just a reviewer.

The stimulus just says “Pilots ->/found it difficult to operate.” Thus the pilot tomorrow prob won’t find it difficult. In this stimulus “many” may as well say all or just be omitted. Of the pilots who flew, none found it difficult.

Yeah if you check out my first post I said that P and C don't match the original, but I think the reason why OP made this post was that JY crosses out the AC based on the two and then proceeds to say that it's not enough to be many and he doesn't provide any other explanation. Hence the "many" debate
@"surfy surf"

I think that many in the stimulus is used in the intuitive dictionary definition way, it isn’t used in a logical way. I think there is a difference between saying “many pilots had no issues, thus tomorrow’s pilot likely won’t have an issue” (meaning at least 1 pilot) vs. “of the many pilots..” (meaning of the NUMEROUS pilots)

Whereas two just means two lol and even without the “enjoy” descriptor, it’s an issue bc it isn’t enough of a sample size to draw a conclusion from.

youbbyun

@"surfy surf"
so how do you know when the LSAC uses "many" via the LSAT definition, or the dictionary definition?

_oshun1_

@username_hello said:
@"surfy surf"
so how do you know when the LSAC uses "many" via the LSAT definition, or the dictionary definition?

@username_hello said:
@"surfy surf"
so how do you know when the LSAC uses "many" via the LSAT definition, or the dictionary definition?

When you can’t translate it logically. “Of the many...” doesn’t translate logically. That would be like of <-> some <-> pilots —> /had issues. Trying to translate that just creates gibberish logic. I don’t think there’s any other similar example on the lsat like this. It’s safe to just keep many =some = 1 or more in mind for 99.99% of the lsat

samantha.ashley92

Yup! Review this.

https://7sage.com/lesson/many-some/