PT26.S3.Q22 - whenever she considers voting

dennisgerrard

So I work on this question. It takes "otherwise" as indicator for bicondition. I wonder which course JY mention about "otherwise"
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-3-question-22/

inactive

bump

beth.flanders

@dennisgerrard, JY talks about "but not otherwise" under the advanced biconditional section of the curriculum. Also, i usually think of the word "otherwise" as an "or else" condition. So on PT26.S3.Q22 I would summarize as:

It is acceptable for Kay to vote for a candidate who disagrees with her on one or more issues IF she disagrees with the other candidates on even more issues. Otherwise (or else) it is unacceptable to vote for that candidate.

dennisgerrard

@beth.flanders thank you so much! I need check the course before viewing the question again.

paul-a-s

Am I misunderstanding something, or does JY get the explanation wrong starting at 2:48 in his explanation? (A usually dangerous train of thought, I know…) https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-3-question-22/

It’s not relevant to this question, but it is relevant to the very next question in the lesson (PT26.S3.Q23) because they share a stimulus.

Here, JY says Kay can’t vote for any of these candidates according to her principle. But that’s disproven by the correct answer choice in the next question: she CAN vote for Medina. Kay disagrees with Medina on 0 issues; she disagrees with Legrand and Norton on 1 issue. Therefore she can vote for Medina, because nothing in the principle prevents Kay from voting for a candidate she agrees with on all important issues. JY says as much in his explanation for the following question.