... rules kick, there is theoretically universal distribution. Much like with the ... all three symptoms? Sure. Theoretically universal distribution. Chart.
... , finitely many, etc.", into the universal/existential dichotomy. This is a ... doomed project because the universal/existential quantifiers ("all"/"some") of ...
... , finitely many, etc.", into the universal/existential dichotomy. This is a ... doomed project because the universal/existential quantifiers ("all"/"some") of ...
I can recognize the validity of mapped arguments quickly, it's just getting it on the paper that's the hard part. I mess it up when translating. I think it may be all the qualifiers and extra language throwing me off.
Also, in general, you should view the qualifiers as training wheels for you to think about language in the way LSAT tests it. Other than that, the only way that'll 100% consistently ensure you get questions right is to understand the argument.
... , furthermore, cannot be simply considered universal statements because a generic statement ... true with exceptions - unlike a universal statement.
For these ... original generic statement to the universal statement "all small animals move ...
I’m not sure, but I doubt it. The LSAT grading scale is designed to account for those discrepancies so that the scores will be universal for people applying with scores from different tests.