PT14.S4.Q21 — What is the definition of "solely?"

simonjww

Hey all,

I'm having trouble translating the conclusion of the argument into logical form, perhaps because of the word "solely." The conclusion states that "it is solely due to ... peppers that he became ill."

I interpreted solely as only (and therefore required), so my diagram was like this:
~ peppers --> ~ sick
sick --> peppers

This is contrary to the explanation here: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-14-section-4-question-21/

Can someone explain how I should interpret solely?

Thanks!

KevinLuminateLSAT

Solely does mean only. But the issue is a single statement can express more than just a conditional relationship. The statement is saying (1) he got sick due to peppers; and (2) there was nothing else besides peppers that made him sick. You're focused on (2), but not noticing (1).

In addition there's a difference between saying

He got sick solely due to peppers.
One can get sick solely through peppers.

The second statement is saying that peppers are necessary for getting sick -- without peppers, you won't get sick. This might be what you have in mind when you write "Sick -> peppers".

The first is saying that peppers were the only thing that made someone sick. But it's not saying that peppers were necessary for getting sick. If you want to think of the first as a conditional, where you reduce it to "sick -> peppers", you have to keep in mind that that would mean "If something made him sick, then it had to be peppers", but it's not saying something universal about what is required for anyone to become sick. (And, the conditional doesn't capture the fact that he did get sick.) So "Sick -> peppers" means something different in each sentence.

This is a good reminder that the practice of diagramming statements into conditional logic is not solely formulaic (see what I did there?) -- you also have to understand and keep in mind the underlying meaning of the statements.