CC; Valid Argument Form 8

Comments

• thisissparta Alum Member

  January 2018 edited January 2018 1363 karma

  Try mapping it out:

  L -> N
  L -m-> M

  So, that means (i) all L's are N's and (ii) most L's are M's.

  L N M
  L N M
  L N
  L N
  L N M

  As you can see, there will be at least some points at which M and N occur simultaneously. This implies that some N's must also be M's. In other words, some animals that like to eat meat also like to nap.
• BinghamtonDave Alum Member ⭐ 🍌🍌

  January 2018 8716 karma

  Hello, the form itself is valid. Meaning there is indeed an inescapable some relationship between Napping and eating meat derived from the premises above.

  The issue of the super set (animals) that encompasses the subset (lions) is something we will see on LR questions all the time. Lions are contained within the set of animals. So to say that some lions like to eat meat and nap is in and of itself to say that some/many/a few/ animals like to eat meat and nap. The LSAT does indeed count on us possessing this "common sense" knowledge.

  There are a whole bunch of places to pause here and describe things in greater detail, but I believe that is the crux of the issue here.

  David
• toniafisher1 Member

  January 2018 edited January 2018 87 karma

  Thanks......Guess I need to work on my ‘common sense’! Seriously, that helps to clarify and I want to make sure I understand this stuff. I appreciate it.
• 2 Likes

  Mindful Monkey Member

  January 2018 136 karma

  Yes! It really is all about understanding sets that various things are a part of.
  If you have knowledge about "pencils," you have knowledge about SOME writing utensils.
  If you have knowledge about "carrots," you have knowledge about SOME vegetables.
  And so forth. You know about some animals, because you know about lions.
  Happy Studying!
• 1 Like

  lady macbeth Alum Member

  January 2018 edited January 2018 894 karma

  When I used to get confused with the valid argument forms, I'd just draw them out in circles. Kind of like JY's bucket examples but i think drawing them out as venn diagrams helps me more visually.

  https://i.imgur.com/Yqirhkp.jpg

  Since all lions love napping, we see that in the set of creatures that nap -- lions are totally subsumed cuz they all love to do It. Most lions like eat meat, so out of the whole set of lions, most of them are part of the "I like meat" club. Thus, you can see that some creatures who love to nap, are also part of the "I like meat" club (shaded). Anyways, you can't draw the conclusion that most creatures who like meat also love napping because lets say you made bigger the "I like meat club" circle and most of that circle was not overlapped with the other two. You don't know how big the "I like meat" club is, so you can't draw the conclusion that most of them love napping. You can only draw the conclusion that some do because some just implies at least one.

  In the beginning of my studies I drew these circles out often whenever I got confused but now have come to become familiar with and memorized all the argument forms.
• toniafisher1 Member

  January 2018 87 karma

  Thanks everyone!