Absolute vs. Relative phrases in LSAT

Jennifer 2021-1-1

Hi,

Could someone please explain the importance of the distincion of the relative and absolute phrases in LR,LG and RC. Thank you

kkole444

Hello Jennifer,
In LR we can see comparative conclusions and premises. For example if someone said "Kole is taller than Jennifer, therefore Kole is tall." This is a relative premise making an absolute conclusion and with no other information given we cannot make this conclusion. This style could come up in a Flaw, strengthen, weaken, PSA, Necessary assumption, Sufficient assumption. What we would have to do in each case would be a little different. For an absolute example we could say, Anyone over seven feet tall is considered tall. Kole is over seven feet tall, therefore Kole is tall. The difference is there is nothing being compared or used as a relative measure in absolute statements. With absolute statements we know whether something is or is not. With relative statements we only know if something is or is not in comparison to something else, but the two or more things being compared could all be at the extremes so they do not have much meaning. For example take the relative statement example and the absolute and think which one we would rather use in trying to figure out if Kole is tall. A) Kole is taller than Jennifer, therefore Kole is tall. Or Anyone over seven feet tall is considered tall. Kole is over seven feet tall, therefore Kole is tall. We would want to use B. With the first statement we do not know how tall Jennifer is or how much taller Kole is than Jenifer. Jenifer could be 5 feel and Kole 5 one, does this make Kole tall? We do not know, we just know Kole is taller than Jennifer. Also depending on what type of LR question it is we could supply a new premise indicating Kole is tall, for example, Anyone taller than Jennifer is tall. This would, depending on the exact wording, be a necessary, sufficient, (possible a strengthen, little too strong). The same idea holds in RC. The importance of noticing the difference is when it comes to picking/eliminating correct incorrect answer choices. Kole is taller than Jennifer, therefore Kole is tall. For a sufficient assumption question we an answer choice could be anyone taller than Jennifer is tall. For a strengthen it could be many things like Jenifer is taller than vast majority of people. Once we interject this into the relative, Kole is taller than Jenifer, therefore Kole is tall, it strengthens the conclusion and increases the likelihood it is true.
In LR the comparative statements are normally in the form of rules in sequencing A is before C which is A---C, but we do not know the relative position to other game pieces like B. With just the first 'rule' B could be anywhere, in front, after both A&C or just after A. It can also be seen in grouping games when the rule says that one category (group) is suppose to have more pieces in it than another group, but it does not specify how many more(usually an inference we have to make between how may groups and how many pieces we have). An absolute in LG would be like B is in stop 5, there is no questing the place of the piece, it does not have a spot relative/ conditional on another piece
---I have no idea if I'm taller than Jennifer,
Kole

Jennifer 2021-1-1

@kkole444 said:
Hello Jennifer,
In LR we can see comparative conclusions and premises. For example if someone said "Kole is taller than Jennifer, therefore Kole is tall." This is a relative premise making an absolute conclusion and with no other information given we cannot make this conclusion. This style could come up in a Flaw, strengthen, weaken, PSA, Necessary assumption, Sufficient assumption.

Thank you @kkole444 for the explanation !