Inherent Inference Recognition Question--Plz help!

User avatar
LSAT_Padawan
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:17 pm

Inherent Inference Recognition Question--Plz help!

Postby LSAT_Padawan » Thu Mar 04, 2010 7:49 pm

In the PowerBible, it asks you to diagram and provide any inherent inference(s):

Airlines fly a route if and only if the route is profitable.

(AFR = airline flies route; RP = route profitable)

Diagram: AFR <-------> RP

Inherent Inferences:

AFR --most--> RP
RP --most--> AFR
AFR --some--> RP

My question is why isn't "RP --some-->AFR" a valid inherent inference?

Thank you for your enlightenment.

Cambridge LSAT
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:26 pm

Re: Inherent Inference Recognition Question--Plz help!

Postby Cambridge LSAT » Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:45 pm

It is valid. Since it's equivalent to AFR --some--> RP, the author didn't need to restate it. Relationships including the term "some" go both ways. For instance, if we know that some As are Bs, we also know that some Bs are As.

User avatar
jnjohn05
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 12:28 am

Re: Inherent Inference Recognition Question--Plz help!

Postby jnjohn05 » Fri Mar 05, 2010 1:07 am

Cambridge has it right. I had the same problem as well when I first started. Once the some diagrammed "train" is established, the connections between the two variables can go either way without an issue.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BobBoblaw, cherrygalore, CHyde, Greenteachurro, Instrumental, Pozzo, VMars and 6 guests