PT11.S2.Q12 - in the centerville botanical gardens

SeriousbirdSeriousbird Alum Member
edited July 2016 in Logical Reasoning 1278 karma
I did this question twice in a span of about 3-4 weeks. I got it wrong both times.

So what I did was diagram the stimulus:

TT-->OM-->OD
S-m->OM

OM=Older than Maples
OD=Older than Dogwoods

A) I eliminated because there is no relationship between dogwoods and tulip trees
B) We don't know anything about the youngest sycamores only about the sycamores that are older than dogwoods
C) I picked this when I did it last night. I actually thought it was correct because we know that most sycamores are older than dogwoods, so there must be some that are either younger or the same age as dogwoods. I guess this is wrong because of "oldest dogwoods" am I correct?
D) Similar to A there is no relationship that can be said between tulip trees and sycamores
E) same as D

Can someone help me. Clearly my reasoning is incorrect somewhere because I got this question wrong not once, but twice. I am incredibly grateful to whoever can help me understand this problem!

Comments

  • AlexAlex Alum Member ⭐
    edited July 2016 23929 karma
    @sweetsecret So I just took a quick look at this question and sort of diagrammed it similar to a sequencing game (If that makes sense?). It makes it a bit easier.

    I think the hardest part of the question is that when diagramming it, you have to sort of randomly choose how you want to diagram the conditionality between older and younger.

    I'm going to try to write up a detailed explanation how how I'm doing it a bit later when I get home. It is definitely not an easy question, so don't feel bad about missing it twice. Fear not, reinforcements are on the way!
  • WhatslsatWhatslsat Member
    edited September 2020 476 karma

    I also spent good amount of time trying to disprove each of the answer choices and understand thoroughly why each were wrong.

    A // can never be true because all Tulips are older than Maples and all Dogwoods are younger than Maples. I.e. None of Dogwoods can reach the age of tulip, if it did they would be older than maples

    B // doesn't have to be true (could be false) since the most of S is older than Ms and ALL the other Sycamores can be EQUALLY old as the Maples in which case none of Dogwoods would be as old as the youngest sycamores.

    C // does not have to be true. it is could be false, because the youngest sycamore CAN be younger than Maples in which case the youngest Sycamores can be as old as the oldest Dogwoods.
    Answer choice with NOT in it is more confusing for MBT questions. <it is not the case that it must be true that some sycamores are not as old as the oldest dogwoods since the youngest sycamores CAN be younger than Maples and be same age as oldest Dogwood.

    D // Similarly Some of the younger Tulips can be as old as the oldest Sycamores. there can be an overlap between Tulips and Sycamores that are older than Maples. I think this one is easier to see.

    E // tricky, but it MUST be true that some sycamores are not as old as the youngest Tulip trees.
    The 'some' here is referring to the minority of the Sycamores that must be either EQUAL to Maples trees or younger than Maples trees. Since all Tulips must be older than ALL maples, those that are same age as maples (some of sycamore) must be not as old as the youngest Tulip trees.

  • jw039298jw039298 Free Trial Member
    4 karma

    @alexhpcs An excellent detailed answer.

  • jw039298jw039298 Free Trial Member
    edited September 2020 4 karma

    Don't you think there is a catch in the conditions? Why tulips can be junior maples, but junior dogwoods maples are possible? How do you think?

    Respectfully
    James Willson: employee https://thinkbotanicals.ca

  • HopefullyHLSHopefullyHLS Member
    445 karma

    Sorry, I might be wrong, but for C:
    I interpreted "not as old as" either "younger" or "older". The majority of the sycamores are older than any maples, and all maples are older than any dogwoods, therefore at least some sycamores must be older (=not as old as) any dogwoods.

    Doesn't C also have to be right under this logic?

  • SammyPenguinSammyPenguin Member
    edited June 2021 19 karma

    If we look at the entire conditional chain spatially, it is more clear to understand.

    We first have this clearly sequential chain between the three trees, and most of the Sycamores overlap with Tulips, and there also must be some Sycamores that are not as old as than the youngest Tulips (see where "es" falls in the diagram below).

     Tulips       |     Maples      |      Dogwoods
        Sycamores 
    (the tail end of Sycamores is not determined)

    And C is saying, "Some Sycamores are not as old as the oldest Dogwoods" but this doesn't have to be true, as we can see from the diagram above. Sure, you can have a diagram like the following:

     Tulips       |     Maples      |      Dogwoods
       Sycam      o        r       e       s

    Here, "s" falls in the age that is "not as old as the oldest Dogwoods."
    but does this have to be true? No, because again, the tail end of Sycamores is not determined.

    It took me a while to figure out this diagram, and I got it wrong during the timed session.
    I hope this makes sense!

Sign In or Register to comment.