## can you infer a necessary condition from "almost invariably"

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

Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 4:45 pm

### can you infer a necessary condition from "almost invariably"

so im just wondering if
A "almost invariably" leads to B

can you call that causation, or necessary/sufficient

StrictlyLiable

Posts: 214
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:34 pm

### Re: can you infer a necessary condition from "almost invariably"

Seems possible. "invariably" alone seems better though.

youknowryan

Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:20 am

### Re: can you infer a necessary condition from "almost invariably"

sangr wrote:so im just wondering if
A "almost invariably" leads to B

can you call that causation, or necessary/sufficient

almost invariably = most, which is numerically 51% to 100%. It therefore cannot be any of the above.

invariably = all and will allow for the above.

dakatz

Posts: 2422
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:19 pm

### Re: can you infer a necessary condition from "almost invariably"

Almost invariably does not denote 100%. Something is only necessary when it follows 100% of the time.

"A sugar rush is almost invariably followed by a crash"

Does this mean that a crash will always follow a sugar rush? No, so the argument isn't deductive. Remember that the LSAT is very specific about these things and those are the types of mixups they expect people to make.

blhblahblah

Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:54 pm

### Re: can you infer a necessary condition from "almost invariably"

In the scientific world, when two variables co-occur at a frequency that meets an acceptable threshold, it can be said that when one occurs the other will occur (controlling of course for third variables, directionality, etc.).

However, for purposes of LSAT, anything less than always is only correlation

whymeohgodno

Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:15 pm

### Re: can you infer a necessary condition from "almost invariably"

It's very simple.

No.