Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.5K All Categories
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 191 Webinars
- 11 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 112 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 35 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 641 Technical Problems
- 288 Off-topic
PT34.S2.Q23 - to be horrific
dennisgerrard
Member
I got it right. But I don't know why J.Y said we can can make "some" statement by contrapositive. The relationship is about "all" statement.
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-2-question-23/
Any idea？
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-2-question-23/
Any idea？
Comments
When you want to negate this statement, [All X, then Y], you don't want to say [All X, then not Y], because it leaves out the middle ground of Some. [Some X are not Y] thus covers the whole range. I believe that there is a section in the curriculum that talks about this step by step.
Hope this helps