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

- 30.1K All Categories
- 25.5K 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
- 14 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
- 510 Technical Problems
- 268 Off-topic

time_to_go
Alum Member

I need confirmation whether my understanding of OR rule is correct.

There is a rule in the last game of PT24 that says: G cannot be prescribed if both N and U are prescribed.

N & U -->/G

Contrapositive= G --> /N or /U

So there are 3 possibilities if the contrapositive is triggered: 1) N is out 2) U is out or 3) N and U are both out.

If I CHANGE the rule to G --> N or U, would 3 possibilities be 1) N is in 2) U is in or 3) N and U are both in?

Is it correct to consider OR in the above examples as inclusive(and/or), not exclusive?

There is a rule in the last game of PT24 that says: G cannot be prescribed if both N and U are prescribed.

N & U -->/G

Contrapositive= G --> /N or /U

So there are 3 possibilities if the contrapositive is triggered: 1) N is out 2) U is out or 3) N and U are both out.

If I CHANGE the rule to G --> N or U, would 3 possibilities be 1) N is in 2) U is in or 3) N and U are both in?

Is it correct to consider OR in the above examples as inclusive(and/or), not exclusive?

## Comments

For the original rule, you can read the contrapositive to mean

"if G is in, at least one of N or U are out"

So all three possibilities you list are correct: U is out, N is out, U and N are both out.

If you CHANGE the rule to G-->N or U, then at least one of N or U would have to be in. So, N in, or U in, or both N and U in.

You've got this!