Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

Confused about diagramming this until statement, help appreciated.

Will DearbornWill Dearborn Alum Member
edited June 2015 in Logical Reasoning 218 karma
Yet not until teachers have the power to make decisions in their own classrooms can they enable their students to make their own decisions.

How would you diagram this? I thought that "until" was negate sufficient, so I negated the "not" and ended up with: Teachers have power to make decisions----------->>>Enable students to make their own decisions.

PrepTest 18 - Section 2 - question 23
Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • NYC12345NYC12345 Alum Inactive Sage
    edited June 2015 1654 karma
    @Patroclus
    It is the exact opposite, I believe.
    The stimulus does not assert that students will be able to make their own decisions IF teachers make their own decisions in the classroom. What the stimulus is saying, however, is that students can't make their own decisions UNLESS teachers can make their own decisions in the classroom.
    Diagram:
    /power------> /enable students
    contrapositive
    enable students-------> power
  • brna0714brna0714 Alum Inactive ⭐
    1489 karma
    @Patroclus -

    I don't have access to this particular question but based off what you've given, this is how I'd diagram the statement:

    Students are able to make their own decisions ----> Teachers have power to make decisions in their own classrooms

    I arrived at that rather intuitively but, essentially, we know for sure that if teachers do NOT have power to make decisions in their own classrooms then they CANNOT enable their students to make their own decisions (NOT teachers have power ---> NOT students able to make their own decisions). Negating this conditional gives you the translation written above.

    Where I think you went wrong is you utilized the "until" translation but did not actually negate the sufficient. As I'm sure you know, you have to choose on of the elements, negate it and set it on the sufficient side. Simply removing the not from "not until" doesn't have the same affect and doesn't produce a proper translation.

    Hope that helps.
  • RebelwendyRebelwendy Alum Member
    168 karma
    Thanks, @alexandergreene93 and @brna0714 - that really helped to clear things up for me, too. I was really thrown by the "not" before "until."
  • bstew2002bstew2002 Alum Member
    269 karma
    @Patroclus I think you are right the first time, but this is not an easy one because one of the ideas is not so clearly negated. But just do whatever you do with other Group 3 words. Delineate the ideas, negate the SC, and there you go. In this case the result would be Teacher's power->Student's power, as you have it.
  • brna0714brna0714 Alum Inactive ⭐
    1489 karma
    @bstew2002 Our opinions normally align, my friend, but I've gotta disagree with you on this one. The original statements says that ONLY in world's where teacher's have power to make decisions (necessary condition) CAN we have the sufficient condition, enabling students to make their own decisions.

    CAN signals that the condition is possible but not guaranteed. The conditional statement as you've written it looks like sufficient/necessity confusion to me but I'd welcome another explanation if I'm missing something.
  • bstew2002bstew2002 Alum Member
    269 karma
    @brna0714 This one is such an outlier that I am more than happy to accept our disagreement... Looking back at it, maybe you're right, not really sure.

    I normally would not even diagram this sentence unless it were an MBT question or something.

    I just want my score. Can you give me my score? I only care about pencil sharpeners now.
  • Matt1234567Matt1234567 Inactive ⭐
    1294 karma
    Honestly, in my opinion, the negate sufficient/negate necessary are tools to help you make this stuff more intuitive so you can draw them out without even thinking. I think a mistake most students do is stick to this trick without really knowing the what the meaning behind the conditions are. Just like a sufficient/necessary flaw. When asked to describe it, a lot of students would just say "well it's a sufficient/necessary flaw" without really knowing what that means.

    Use the trick of negate sufficient/necessary, but don't depend on it or in some instances it'll confuse you into translating the elements wrong. Also, when you're translating, translate in more than one way.

    For instance, All apples are green.
    If you are an apple, then you are green.
    You are not an apple, unless you are green.
    You cannot be an apple without being green.
    Only if green, are you an apple.
    Unless you are green, you are not an apple.

    that's just an example of all the ways you should consider translating statements.
  • brna0714brna0714 Alum Inactive ⭐
    1489 karma
    @Matt1234567 - Word.

    @bstew2002 - We talked about this, man. As long as you used your Blackwing sharpener and didn't touch an inferior sharpener for 30 days prior to the test, you're set. Guaranteed 180. Actually.... I heard that in that situation you can just call up LSAC and tell them what score you want. No sweat.
  • nicole.hopkinsnicole.hopkins Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐
    7965 karma
    @brna0714 said:
    We talked about this, man. As long as you used your Blackwing sharpener and didn't touch an inferior sharpener for 30 days prior to the test, you're set. Guaranteed 180. Actually.... I heard that in that situation you can just call up LSAC and tell them what score you want. No sweat.
    HAHA.

    I'll tell them I want a 181 and a pony.
Sign In or Register to comment.