It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

- 30.2K All Categories
- 25.6K LSAT
- 15.8K General
- 26 Sage Advice
- 4.6K Logical Reasoning
- 1.2K Reading Comprehension
- 1.6K Logic Games
- 65 Podcasts
- 186 Webinars
- 5 Scholarships
- 191 Test Center Reviews
- 1.7K Study Groups
- 98 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.2K Specific LSAT Dates
- 20 June 2023 LSAT
- 6 April 2023 LSAT
- 9 February 2023 LSAT
- 25 January 2023 LSAT
- 4.6K Not LSAT
- 3.8K Law School Admissions
- 8 Law School Explained
- 11 Forum Rules
- 514 Technical Problems
- 271 Off-topic

time_to_go
Alum Member

I'm not sure why 1) negating morally right to mean morally wrong is incorrect and 2) negating right to mean wrong is incorrect. Please explain!

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-june-2007-section-2-question-23

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-june-2007-section-2-question-23

## Comments

Siting here eating soup is not morally right, but it's not morally wrong, either. So "eating soup" would be in the "not morally right" category but it wouldn't be in the "morally wrong" category.

P and Q are contraries if they can't both be true but can both be false (e.g. 'X is right' and 'X is wrong').

P and Q are contradictories if they can't both be true and can't both be false (e.g. 'X is dead' and 'X is alive').

Subcontraries can't both be false but can both be true (e.g. 'Some dogs are furry' and 'Some dogs aren't furry').

For more about these kinds of relations, check out the Square of Opposition.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_of_opposition

QED