Diagramming help!

greg737
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 5:20 pm

Diagramming help!

Postby greg737 » Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:59 pm

OK, so I'm usually pretty good at diagramming all the statements, but this one, for some reason, I just can't get. The double negatives always mess me up.

How would you diagram this statement: "No competent manager lacks the skills necessary to be a good mayor"?

Thanks for the help.

User avatar
DearCan
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:13 am

Re: Diagramming help!

Postby DearCan » Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:11 pm

greg737 wrote:OK, so I'm usually pretty good at diagramming all the statements, but this one, for some reason, I just can't get. The double negatives always mess me up.

How would you diagram this statement: "No competent manager lacks the skills necessary to be a good mayor"?

Thanks for the help.


Competent Manager --> Has skills necessary to be a good mayor

~Have skills necessary to be a good mayor --> ~Competent Manager

I think this is right...

User avatar
lennonist
Posts: 164
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 9:38 pm

Re: Diagramming help!

Postby lennonist » Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:14 pm

greg737 wrote:OK, so I'm usually pretty good at diagramming all the statements, but this one, for some reason, I just can't get. The double negatives always mess me up.

How would you diagram this statement: "No competent manager lacks the skills necessary to be a good mayor"?

Thanks for the help.


competent manager --> lacks the skills necessary to be a good mayor
or
lack of skills necessary to be a good mayor --> competent manager

User avatar
DearCan
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:13 am

Re: Diagramming help!

Postby DearCan » Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:18 pm

lennonist wrote:
greg737 wrote:OK, so I'm usually pretty good at diagramming all the statements, but this one, for some reason, I just can't get. The double negatives always mess me up.

How would you diagram this statement: "No competent manager lacks the skills necessary to be a good mayor"?

Thanks for the help.


competent manager --> lacks the skills necessary to be a good mayor
or
lack of skills necessary to be a good mayor --> competent manager


I think your first diagram might do more to confuse OP because he's having a problem with double negatives. The same thing is said with:

competent manager ---> has skills necessary to be a good mayor

It's also more straightforward.

greg737
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 5:20 pm

Re: Diagramming help!

Postby greg737 » Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:28 pm

Sweet, OK that's what I thought. ... the double negative basically makes it an All statement. Maybe it's just this problem that I can't figure out. For the life of me I can't figure out the flaw on Question 21 in the first LR section of the June 2010 test. I am totally stumped.

If anyone has access to that problem cuz they also took the test, please help me out! I'd appreciate it. You can PM me you like.

JJDancer
Posts: 1564
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:41 pm

Re: Diagramming help!

Postby JJDancer » Fri Oct 01, 2010 3:14 pm

#21)
No competent manager lacks the skills necessary to be a good mayor
If you are a competent manager then you do not lack skills needed to be good mayor

Diagram: CM --> - lack skills needed to be good mayor
lack skills needed to be good mayor --> -CM

Stimulus says: (create a chain)
candidate in mayor race --> small business owner
MOST SBO --> Competent Managers --> - lack skills needed to be good mayor
CONCLUSION: MOST candidates have skills to be good mayor. Most candidates NOT lack skills to be good mayor.

In parallel flaw questions you first need to ID the flaw. Which is that let's say there are 100 total SBOwners in the world. Of those most (more than 50%) are Competent managers.
Let's say 20 are not competent managers. Out of those 20, 5 are all the people running for mayor. Therefore, we can't conclude just based on MOST SBO --> CM that most of the candidates have skills to be good mayor.. because they could all be lacking the skills.
(NOT being competent doesn't guarantee that you are LACKING skills, but the way the argument is set up, we can't CONCLUDE that any of the candidates at all have the skills. Some could, most could, none could or all could have the skills - but we don't have the right info to CONCLUDE IT.

Look at B:
On the menu --> fat free.
MOST fat free --> sugar free --> low in calories
MOST items on menu --> low in calories

(see how it's the same flaw?)

greg737
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 5:20 pm

Re: Diagramming help!

Postby greg737 » Fri Oct 01, 2010 3:28 pm

Yup I see it now, thanks for the explanation. I read it the first statement about "each of the candidates is a small business owner" as a state of fact and not a suf-nec condition. Now it makes sense, though.

Thanks again.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bearedman8, Bing [Bot], CPA-->JD, DumbHollywoodActor, jonny27, Lahtso Nuggin, mrgstephe, MSNbot Media, rinkrat19, stego, StopLawying, Tazewell and 20 guests