Question About a LSAT Problem

Amanda.Washington

I am looking at the LSAT Prep book distributed by Kaplan and I am already confused about the material. (I have not purchased a 7Sage course yet as I'm on the trial, so I hope it is okay that I am already asking questions). The first chapter is about LSAT Reasoning and Levels of Truth (true, false, and possible). I know this may sound stupid since we already think about Levels of Truth in our daily lives, but I'm really not understanding the material based on the way they have worded things...

The book says that possible can be described as "could be true" and "could be false". Can a statement possibly be true and possibly be false at the same time, or is it just one or the other? For example, one "question stem" they gave was "Which of the following must be true?" The analysis was the answer must be true and "Therefore, the four wrong answers must be false, or are merely possible (i.e., could be false)." When they said the wrong answers could be "merely possible (i.e., could be false)", why did they not describe "merely possible" as could be false OR could be true? Is it because a could be true statement can be proven to be false?

Another example is when they ask the question, "Which of the following could be true?" The analysis was the answer could be true and that a "must be true" answer would also fit. Why is this? Isn't a "must be true" answer different from "could be true"? It has already been proven that it is true...

In other words, can a statement possibly be false or possibly be true at the same time, or is it just one or the other? Can a statement ALWAYS "possibly be true" and "must be true" at the same time?

I guess if I am getting tripped up on such a simple concept maybe I should just give up now...I really overthink things...

Thank you!

-Amanda

Micaela_OVO

1) Can a statement possibly be true and possibly be false at the same time, or is it just one or the other? In short, yes. The fact pattern we're given doesn't allow us to conclude that a certain statement (the answer choice) is true or false. It COULD be true or false.

Consider this fact pattern:
Drake is a successful rapper from Toronto. He started his own record label, October's Very Own. He ranks third in the world for "Most Hit Singles" on Billboard Hot 100.

Which of the following could be true?
A) Drake is from Houston.
Madonna founded October's Very Own
C) Drake has had zero hit singles
D) Drake does not know how to rap
E) Drake's favorite song is "Hotline Bling."

A. Must be false. Eliminate.
B. False. Drake founded OVO.
C. False. Third in the world.
D. False. He's a successful rapper and third in the world for "Most Hit Singles." We can conclude he knows how to rap.
E. There you go (JY voice). This could be true. The facts don't tell us what his favorite song is. Is it "Started From The Bottom," "0 to 100," "Hotline Bling" or an oldie? We just don't know. Do you see how a statement "could be true" and "could be false" at the same time?

bbutler

Amanda first of all don't give up because every single one of us on here have ran into questions/concepts that have tripped us up, even the people that have scored in the 170's so don't feel bad. Now let me see if I can help clear some of this information up for you.

Can a statement possibly be true and possibly be false at the same time, or is it just one or the other?

Yes a statement that is a "could be true" COULD be read as "could be false" but it doesn't necessarily HAVE to be. See the explanation below

Think of a spectrum from 0 to 100 where the point 0 represents that there is NO possibility for something to happen (Must be false) while the point 100 that represents that something absolutely will happen 100% (Must Be True).

Now for "Could be true" you want to think of this as "some possibility of X happening". As long as there is a 1% chance of something happening then we can say that something could be true. This is why there is a range from (1-100) because it can go all of the way from 1% chance of something happening to 100% chance of something happening. Although somewhat confusing if something is 100% chance of happening can we still say that there is at least 1% chance of happening, yes and this is why if something Must be True than it Could be True and therefore includes the point 100. We can't include 0 or "Must be false" because if we know that there is 100% certainty that something WON'T happen then we know that there is no chance that it will happen and thereby fails our definition of Could be True.

For "Could be false" the range goes from 0-99. The way you want to think about Could be False is "some chance of X NOT happening". As long as there is 1% of something NOT happening then we can say that the statement "Could be false". This is why the range goes from 0-99 and has an overlap with "could be true" but doesn't have to include it. If we say that there is a 99% chance of something happening then we can also say that there is a 1% that something won't happen and hence forth the statement "could be true" or it could be false". This range goes all the way down to 0 because if we know that for something to be considered "could be false" it has to have a some percentage of X not happening, and 0 represents 0% chance of something happening or in other terms (100% chance of something NOT happening) then we can see why 0 is included in our range.

So to answer your question yes a statement "could be true" and "could be false", the only times where it isn't is a case when a statement is a "must be true" or a "must be false statement". This is why when you get a "Must be true" question the WRONG answer choices are "could be false statements" because they represent the range from 0-99. When you have a "Must be False" question the WRONG answer choices will be "could be true" or the range from 1-100. Vice versa when you have a "could be true statement" the WRONG answer choice will be something that MUST BE FALSE because it's the point 0 that isn't concluded, while "could be true" questions the WRONG answer choices will all be MUST BE TRUE because the point 100 isn't included in the range. Does that make sense?

kennedybj

@"Micaela_OVO" said:
D) Drake does not know how to rap

This could technically be true...

runiggyrun

@Micaela_OVO - if that's a real example I'm forever impressed by your knowledge of rap. And your explanation was excellent. I also often hear JY's voice in my head, just like you are pointing out!
@Amanda.Washington - if you're a visual person, this might help:
The "could be true" bucket completely encloses the smaller, "must be true" bucket, plus the "we don't know" bucket.
The "could be false" bucket completely encloses the smaller, "must be false" bucket, plus the "we don't know bucket"
The big buckets overlap (through their "we don't know" components), but the small ones never do.
So, a "must be true" statement can be a correct answer for both a "must be true" and "could be true" question, but a "could be true" statement is not necessarily correct for a "must be true" question.

Micaela_OVO

@kennedybj said:
@"Micaela_OVO" said:
D) Drake does not know how to rap

This could technically be true...


Those are fighting words. Haha, but if you're serious: All NBA players know how to play basketball. We can't conclude they don't know how to play. You may think a certain player doesn't play well, but they still know how to play. Same with the Drake example. Given his career, we can conclude he knows how to rap. So answer choice D is not a "could be true." Sure, one might think he doesn't rap well, but that's not what the answer choice says.

Nicole Hopkins

@Amanda.Washington said:
I have not purchased a 7Sage course yet as I'm on the trial, so I hope it is okay that I am already asking questions

Yes yes! We would love for you to bring all your questions to our forums even if you never purchase a course.

@Amanda.Washington said:
I am looking at the LSAT Prep book distributed by Kaplan and I am already confused about the material.
[...]
I'm really not understanding the material based on the way they have worded things...

The problem is at least in part due to the fact that this is a Kaplan book we're talking about. Kaplan really has no business teaching the LSAT but they make a lot of money doing it. I recommend you throw that book away and either get a copy of The LSAT Trainer or, better yet, the 7sage course.

@Amanda.Washington said:
I guess if I am getting tripped up on such a simple concept maybe I should just give up now...I really overthink things...

NO WAY!!! Kaplan's doing an awful job of explaining this to you. Don't let their failure to teach make you feel that you're not up to the task. You just need a better coach.

MrSamIam

1) You're over thinking this. A statement could be true, or could be false at the same time. In fact, both could be true and could be false can imply each other. If I say something COULD be true, I am leaving open the possibility for it being false. Vice versa for could be false. Ex: "I twisted my ankle and the snowboarding trip is in 3 months, so I might (could) go." I am not committing to anything; if my ankle gets better, I could go, if not, I may not go.

2) The two phrases don't mean the same thing. However, if I told you that it must be true that I'm going snowboard on the 20th, would it be wrong to say that it "could be true" that I'm going snowboarding on the 20th? Absolutely not. You could most certainly say that it could be true. Why? Because it leaves open the possibility that I'll go - which, we already know, will be the case.
So, if asked to find a Could Be True answer, you CAN provide a Must Be True answer. "Can it be true that Sam is going snowboarding on the 20th?" "Well yes, of course it can, he told me that he's going!"

Note that just because a statement is possibly true (could be true), it does not mean it MUST be true. For must be true statement, you should be able to say that, given what I am told, there is absolutely no way for me to say that it cannot be true - in other words, it absolutely must be true.

This will all start making sense once you begin making your way through the lessons. In fact, I bet you'll look back and laugh at these questions - not that there is anything wrong with them.

I honestly feel that Kaplan is making it sound way more confusing than it actually is.

Amanda.Washington

@Micaela_OVO Hi Micaela. Thank you for the explanation! 8) It was very easy to understand. So basically a statement can be true and it can be false, because we don't have enough information to determine whether or not it is true. So whether or not something could be true depends on context (Drake's favorite song could be "Hotline Bling", but we don't know for sure. The other answers are false so this is the only logical answer).

Amanda.Washington

@bbutler Yes, this makes sense! All the details you gave really helped me. The Kaplan book doesn't have nearly that much detail (it's only about a sentence or so), so when I'm confused I have no idea where to go for an explanation. Then the book moves onto something else while I'm sitting there confused...I'm debating on whether or not I should just not continue with the book. I don't want to get even more confused.

Thank you for the help! 8)

Amanda.Washington

@runiggyrun Thank you for your explanation! I actually drew it out on a piece of paper. One question I have is why doesn't the "must be true" bucket and "must be false" bucket encompass the "could be true" bucket and "could be false" bucket?

Amanda.Washington

@"Nicole Hopkins" Yeah, I'm just debating on not reading the Kaplan book anymore ha ha. I don't want to get more confused...Thank you all for the kindness and support! I do feel overwhelmed when I get confused, which makes me doubt myself. So thank you, I won't give up. 8)

Amanda.Washington

@MrSamIam Thank you! So basically you can use a "must be true answer" for a "could be true" answer, but I can't always use a "could be true" answer for a "must be true" answer? Yes, the book confuses me because it does not provide a lot of detail. I do overthink things, especially when I am confused. Then I get even more nervous and blank out....
I don't think I will look at the Kaplan book anymore and I will buy the 7Sage Ultimate course when I can. 8)

MrSamIam

@Amanda.Washington Yup, you nailed it! Sometimes you can appeal to your intuition or basic understanding of grammar to make sense of these statements.
"There's a chance that I'll go fishing this weekend." Must it be the case that I'm going to go fishing? Nope! I never committed, I said that there is a chance. But, could it be the case? Of course, I just said that I'm leaving open the possibility that I will go fishing.

"I WILL go fishing this weekend." Must it be the case that I am going to go fishing this weekend? Yes, I just said I will. Could it be the case that I am going to go fishing this weekend? Of course it could be, not only have I not precluded that possibility, but I made it clear that I will.