Conditional language

asgysi

Take the statement (drawn from an actual stimulus) that says "the habit of volunteering cannot be said to have been fostered in a person who has not yet volunteered for anything" and put it into a conditional statement. Would it be if Habit of Volunteering then Volunteered? I try to see what is indicated as the necessary condition in translating into conditional language from statements without indicators. Is this a good idea? Are there other senses or intuitive skills you can use to translate complex sentences?

nicole.hopkins

@asgysi said:
Are there other senses or intuitive skills you can use to translate complex sentences?

Yeah just don't worry about translating this kind of thing into lawgic.

Alex Short

I have to echo what Nicole said. This kind of statement is best something you read - and just understand intuitively.

Learning conditional logic may be very important to the LSAT, but those who do very very well on the test ultimately learn conditional logic so that they can read complex statements like that one without having to translate it.

Ask yourself if you truly "get" the sentence more if you change it into "if ...then..." form. The above appears way too complex when translated that way.

Jonathan Wang

Disagree with the above. It seems to me that knowing how to do something and knowing when to utilize that knowledge are two entirely separate questions. If you really know how a sentence works, you should know whether it's conditional and, if so, how it translates. If you don't, then you'd better learn how it works so you can make sure you understand the sentence properly. I don't see why making sure you understand the sentence has anything to do with what kind of strategy you end up employing to tackle the question.

What happens when, in a different question, you don't 'just get it'? What happens if that statement is about quantum physics terms that you've never heard of before, or maybe some characteristic of a rare African insect with a 36-letter name, instead of volunteering? People with toolboxes still have their tools to utilize; people who relied solely on 'just getting it' just sit and stare.

This is different than saying that mapping is mandatory for you to answer that question, because that's not necessarily true. The strategy you use for the question is dependent on the context. But if you don't map that statement because you don't think it's necessary for you to answer that question, it should be a reasoned decision based on your understanding of that sentence and its relationship with the other information you're given, not a product of laziness or confusion. Complexity is not an excuse for complacency, and intuition is built from your explicit knowledge. If you don't have the explicit knowledge, your intuition is nothing more than an educated guess. Garbage in, garbage out.

TL;DR: You may not always utilize mapping in your actual tackling of the question, but that doesn't excuse you from knowing how it works.

For the record, your translation is correct. No Volunteer -> No Habit Fostered, and the contrapositive is what you state.

nicole.hopkins

@"Jonathan Wang" said:
You may not always utilize mapping in your actual tackling of the question

And thus my recommendation of not worrying about "translating" it.

hlsat180

...but that doesn't excuse you from knowing how it works.

I understand what OP is seeking, but technically the term "intuitive skills" seems impossible by definition (intuitive = arrived at without reason or evidence) if not inherently contradictory (skill = an ability acquired via learning).

Regardless, the solution is the same: Learn the tools and, ironically, you may then find that you've now acquired the "intuitive skills."

nicole.hopkins

@hlsat180 said:
Learn the tools and, ironically, you may then find that you've now acquired the "intuitive skills."

Sounds good!

fishtwentyfive

"the habit of volunteering cannot be said to have been fostered in a person who has not yet volunteered for anything"

The habit of volunteering = H
Volunteered for anything = V

Original Statement:
~ H if ~ V
unfix the 'if':
~ V > ~ H
contrapose:
H > V

That is, If someone has a habit of volunteering, then they must have volunteered before.
You end up with a wonderfully clean conditional at the end! Who knew!

asgysiq

hlsat180, this isn't necessarily important to the point at issue here but I think you had a biased hand in emphasizing certain definitions of terms to fit your conclusion that "intuitive skill" is contradictory. Using your intuition means doing something without conscious reasoning; in other words something that's second nature or instinctive. A skill is just something you do well. So an intuitive skill would be in the sense of a skill that's fundamental and natural, as opposed to necessarily contrived or based on specific rules. So OP is talking about using the right intuitive approach.