Question about preptest 25, Section 2, (LR) #22

NaturalLawyer
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 10:37 am

Question about preptest 25, Section 2, (LR) #22

Postby NaturalLawyer » Wed Jul 28, 2010 5:07 pm

I'm having a hard time with this one. What is the clearest way to think through this question?

I would appreciate any instructive advice!

:D

fosterp
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 5:09 am

Re: Question about preptest 25, Section 2, (LR) #22

Postby fosterp » Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:07 pm

Basically the stimulus is a conditional statement that is then reworded as the contrapositive of that statement. If not government subsidy then art not allowed. If art allowed then government subsidy.

/Gs -> /A

A -> Gs

Then you look at the answer choices and find the one that basically gives two conditional statements that are contrapositives of each other.

A is correct because it gives two statements that are contrapositive of each other. If not arrested then not breaking law. If breaking law then arrested. /A -> /B, B -> A

B - is wrong because of mistaken negation. /A -> /B, A -> B

C - is wrong because the two statements are mistaken reversals. G -> S, S -> G.

D - is wrong because the two statements are a mistaken negation. G -> S, /G -> /S

E - is wrong because it rewords using information not contained in the original statement.

The difficulty of this question is the wording of the conditional statements is kind of confusing to be able to properly diagram their conditional statements easily, especially since the stimulus uses different words to convey the same meaning (government support turns into government subsidy).

To be able to get this question fast you would need to be really good at translating conditional statements to symbolic form. I myself am pretty bad at this and it took me a while to figure out how the stim is supposed to be drawn.

NaturalLawyer
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 10:37 am

Re: Question about preptest 25, Section 2, (LR) #22

Postby NaturalLawyer » Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:09 am

I see now. Makes perfect sense. Just have to get used to translating these kinds of arguments quickly and efficiently into conditional form.

I think in this way LR is trickier than LG. In LG the conditional statements are much more straightforward. But in LR, we need to translate what are sometimes awkwardly worded sentences into its logical form. I'm hoping that as I gain more practice, such translations become automatic.

Thanks a lot!




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cherrygalore, Instrumental, Ques, Tomthecat and 11 guests