PT 57 LR2 #14

borntokill
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 8:26 am

PT 57 LR2 #14

Postby borntokill » Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:55 pm

Could anyone pls help me with the food labeling question?
Formal logic is killing me

User avatar
furrywalls
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:16 pm

Re: PT 57 LR2 #14

Postby furrywalls » Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:22 am

IMO this is a good question to ask for help on if you need it. It's formal logic at it's core but in general I would label it a principle question and there seems to be more and more of these in recent tests. Here's the formal logic breakdown:

Can be Labeled Nonfat--> Most people mistakenly believe the food contains fat
~Most people mistakenly believe food to contain fat--> CANNOT be labeled nonfat (Contrapositive)

Most people mistakenly believe food contains fat--> CAN be labeled nonfat IF the label ALSO says that it doesn't ordinarily contain fat
CANNOT be labeled nonfat EVEN if label says that it doesn't ordinarily contain fat--> ~Most people believe food contains fat

or simply,

LNF-->MB
~MB--> ~LNF
MB--> LNF + DOCF
~LNF--> ~MB

If the formal logic doesn't seem to clear up this question for you then I would suggest treating it like a straightforward principle question. Read it carefully one time through and then pause to think about the big picture. Don't over analyze because you sense formal logic. Just read it and think ok, labels can't mislead the customers unless the customers have a mistaken belief regarding the product in the first place. AND if that's the case the label is allowed to correct this misconception as long as it tells the customer that it is not special, they were just under a false assumption to begin with. Thinking about it like this is just easier to me. One thing I had to remember while studying for the LSAT was to practice the skills necessary for success but also remember to keep my common sense with me at all times (Definitely not implying that you failed to do this) because with so much reading and the pressure created by the time constraints it is easy to read too far into a stimulus.

The answer choices can be gone through quickly with this approach. The first thing you are looking for is whether or not it is labeled "Nonfat". Then if it does you find the one that customers don't have mistaken beliefs about or it doesn't include the added statement of clarity. With a question like this that asks you to find the violator out of the answer choices the odds are that the correct answer will not be a product that is not labeled nonfat. After all the stimulus is about products that can or cant be labeled nonfat, and that if they are, they need to say that they're not special.

I hope this made sense/helps. Feel free to PM me if I can do anything to explain it further. Good Luck.

borntokill
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 8:26 am

Re: PT 57 LR2 #14

Postby borntokill » Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:45 am

thanks for this detailed explanation!
i tend to be nervous when i encounter formal logic or convoluted rules and lose sight of what's going on in the argument
will try your approach,
thanks again

furrywalls wrote:IMO this is a good question to ask for help on if you need it. It's formal logic at it's core but in general I would label it a principle question and there seems to be more and more of these in recent tests. Here's the formal logic breakdown:

Can be Labeled Nonfat--> Most people mistakenly believe the food contains fat
~Most people mistakenly believe food to contain fat--> CANNOT be labeled nonfat (Contrapositive)

Most people mistakenly believe food contains fat--> CAN be labeled nonfat IF the label ALSO says that it doesn't ordinarily contain fat
CANNOT be labeled nonfat EVEN if label says that it doesn't ordinarily contain fat--> ~Most people believe food contains fat

or simply,

LNF-->MB
~MB--> ~LNF
MB--> LNF + DOCF
~LNF--> ~MB

If the formal logic doesn't seem to clear up this question for you then I would suggest treating it like a straightforward principle question. Read it carefully one time through and then pause to think about the big picture. Don't over analyze because you sense formal logic. Just read it and think ok, labels can't mislead the customers unless the customers have a mistaken belief regarding the product in the first place. AND if that's the case the label is allowed to correct this misconception as long as it tells the customer that it is not special, they were just under a false assumption to begin with. Thinking about it like this is just easier to me. One thing I had to remember while studying for the LSAT was to practice the skills necessary for success but also remember to keep my common sense with me at all times (Definitely not implying that you failed to do this) because with so much reading and the pressure created by the time constraints it is easy to read too far into a stimulus.

The answer choices can be gone through quickly with this approach. The first thing you are looking for is whether or not it is labeled "Nonfat". Then if it does you find the one that customers don't have mistaken beliefs about or it doesn't include the added statement of clarity. With a question like this that asks you to find the violator out of the answer choices the odds are that the correct answer will not be a product that is not labeled nonfat. After all the stimulus is about products that can or cant be labeled nonfat, and that if they are, they need to say that they're not special.

I hope this made sense/helps. Feel free to PM me if I can do anything to explain it further. Good Luck.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: etramak and 3 guests