PT 34: June 01, LG, section 4, 19-24

LJackson
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:10 pm

PT 34: June 01, LG, section 4, 19-24

Postby LJackson » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:50 pm

Ls-->Nr + Nr-->Os = Ls-->Os (combination of rules 3 + 4)
Ls-->Pr + P--r>Os = Ls-->Or (combination of rules 3 + 5)

I've looked at it 4 times and can't figure out what I am missing. Does this mean Ls is not possible or am I messing up my conditionals? Help, please..?

User avatar
abbas123
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:01 am

Re: PT 34: June 01, LG, section 4, 19-24

Postby abbas123 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:16 pm

you're def right. Ls isn't possible.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=98628&start=75#p2368792

LJackson
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: PT 34: June 01, LG, section 4, 19-24

Postby LJackson » Sat Mar 27, 2010 12:44 pm

OK, cool. Thanks for the link. You would think if they are going do something like that they would atleast insert a "which of the following can never be placed in S" question so you atleast know you're missing something. They are just plain mean people.

User avatar
abbas123
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:01 am

Re: PT 34: June 01, LG, section 4, 19-24

Postby abbas123 » Sat Mar 27, 2010 2:43 pm

haha i hear you. i agree that they are plain mean, but not for that reason.

they actually do ask about something really similar to Ls never happening, though.

they ask which two can't ever both be on R simultaneously - answer: N and P. Ls causes Nr and Pr, so there you go.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, DumbHollywoodActor, Majestic-12 [Bot], mjb447, MSNbot Media, nahmjun and 21 guests