Jump to content

westcoaster5000

Members
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About westcoaster5000

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I am confused because it looks like I could apply the same logic that is used to justifying /S being in if we start with J, H, M being in (given that /S is a sufficient condition). What confuses me is that you could apply the same logic starting with S being in (using my contrapositive diagram), and thus making W, G, /H, and /J all sufficient conditions. Please tell me how this is not the case.
  2. I am justifying all of them being IN because if we start with S being in, then doesn't that make W, G, /H, and /J all sufficient conditions? Correct me if I am wrong. But I thought all sufficient conditions could IN or OUT. I am applying the same logic used to justify /S being in when starting with J, H, M being in.
  3. For a quick link to the logic game: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-4-game-2/ I am so confused with question 9. I understand the logic 7Sage uses to illustrate how if G and W are out then H, J, M, and S can be in. With that logic, if H, J, M are in, then any sufficient conditions could also be in, (in this case also S), and therefore count a total of 4 in. But with this logic of making all sufficient conditions free floaters, couldn’t you also do the following to justify there being 6 in the “in” category? /S —> J —> H –> /G —> /W ……..M –> (and then run the contrapositive) W —> G —> /H —> /J —> S …………………..—> /M In this case, all you could say is S is in, and therefore, let all other letters be sufficient conditions, and therefore free floaters, and therefore put them all in the “in” category, and therefore count a total of 6 as “in”. How could this alternative possibility not be wrong?!?!?!?!?!?!? Sufficient and necessary conditions made so much sense up until this one point.
×
×
  • Create New...