## Can someone confirm an error in PT 20 for me?

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
thecynic69

Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:33 pm

### Can someone confirm an error in PT 20 for me?

a quick note: not sure what the rules are for posting specific information about LSAT questions (even the old ones), so I'm going to go ahead and remain nice and vague.

Hi all,

I'm back to studying and just did the fourth game of PT 20 (questions 19-24). It is a balanced advanced linear game, and shockingly easy if you make the deduction Kaplan says you should; however, I think the deduction requires a pretty cavalier assumption, which is that the variables from set A are evenly distributed among the variables in set B (i.e., each member of B is linked to two members in A). Nothing in the rules states this distribution must hold, and without knowing the distribution of the variables, I don't see how to get to Kaplan's key deduction.

It'd be great if someone would have a look and help me out. I don't like to cry error on the LSAT because it is usually code for "I made a mistake (and maybe don't want to admit it)." I'm a little worried there might be a way to make the key deduction even without assuming any particular distribution of variables; if there is, I'd greatly appreciate someone pointing me in the right direction.

Nikrall

Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 8:25 pm

### Re: Can someone confirm an error in PT 20 for me?

What deduction are you talking about that makes the game easy but that you believe requires an assumption?

thecynic69

Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:33 pm

### Re: Can someone confirm an error in PT 20 for me?

Nikrall wrote:What deduction are you talking about that makes the game easy but that you believe requires an assumption?

I PMed you.

thecynic69

Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:33 pm

### Re: Can someone confirm an error in PT 20 for me?

For others who might be able to help, the key deduction is of the form "this member of B is linked to these two members of A, and only these two members. this second member of B is linked to this member of A, one of these two members of A, and no others. and the third member of B is linked to this member of A, one of these two members of A, and no others."

thecynic69

Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:33 pm

### Re: Can someone confirm an error in PT 20 for me?

nikrall pointed out to me that there is another way to get the deduction that doesn't require a bad assumption (and is quite embarrassingly straightforward...) case closed!

Nikrall

Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 8:25 pm

### Re: Can someone confirm an error in PT 20 for me?

thecynic69 wrote:nikrall pointed out to me that there is another way to get the deduction that doesn't require a bad assumption (and is quite embarrassingly straightforward...) case closed!

I said this in a PM, but it bears repeating.

No sweat. It happens a lot, actually. As humans we see what we expect to see. One way of clearing your mind is to get up, stop looking at the problem and go look outside or at something unrelated for a moment. Then come back to the game and look at it anew and try not to make any prior assumptions that you made.

Happens to the best of us

Return to â€œLSAT Prep and Discussion Forumâ€?

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests