Question type in LG bible Forum

[Easy-E]

Hello everyone, I'm currently working my way through the LG bible and I have a question, specifically concerning one of the earlier Linear Setup Practice Drill questions. Their not full problems (at least, no full set of questions), their just for you to try and learn to set up the game/rules efficiently. I'm actually using the LSAT Blog's style of diagramming for these types of questions rather than the LGB system of putting all the "Not" rules down, but thats beside the point.

For question 12 on page 57, their is a problem with two questions. Both questions can be answered very easily from the games initial conditions and set-up. One is a specific condition that immediately requires one choice to be true, and the other question is answerable simply by knowing how many elements the game has to fit into so many bases (in this case, the days of the week).

My question is, do easy questions like this appear on the LSAT often? I'm getting pretty good with checking conditions against the initial rules to see what works and what doesn't, but will their be questions that involve answers simply being in violation of the basic-set up of the game? This could be like the previous question, or maybe a "Which of the following would be an acceptable ordering of the elements" question, and one element is included twice while one is excluded (assuming the rules of the game to be 1:1 element:base).

Or is this question type only really included in here to ensure your diagramming is correct, since thats all the information needed to find the answer?



I hope that made sense, thanks!

[Easy-E]

Was this a dumb question or something?

[tehrocstar]

If you diagram is perfectly setup, you'll definitely encountered questions you can solve in less than 5 seconds, and not surprising to see more than 1 in a section. But as with everything, questions will range in difficulty from super easy to super hard.

So to answer your question, absolutely there are questions that will be that easy.

[Jeffort]

Yes, there is always a fair amount of super easy questions per LG section that are simply testing you about the basic implications of the given conditions.

No matter how low a persons score range is, I've never heard of an instance where somebody that made an attempt at a LG section got zero attempted questions correct. There are easy points available to grab by anybody that can and does read the conditions and questions.

[youarereadingthis]

Yes, there is always a fair amount of super easy questions per LG section that are simply testing you about the basic implications of the given conditions.

No matter how low a persons score range is, I've never heard of an instance where somebody that made an attempt at a LG section got zero attempted questions correct. There are easy points available to grab by anybody that can and does read the conditions and questions.

You'd be surprised what can happen if you make a reading error. It can make you miss every single question on a game. Yes, I sometimes surprise myself with my own stupidity.

[Jeffort]

Yes, there is always a fair amount of super easy questions per LG section that are simply testing you about the basic implications of the given conditions.

No matter how low a persons score range is, I've never heard of an instance where somebody that made an attempt at a LG section got zero attempted questions correct. There are easy points available to grab by anybody that can and does read the conditions and questions.

You'd be surprised what can happen if you make a reading error. It can make you miss every single question on a game. Yes, I sometimes surprise myself with my own stupidity.

No, I wouldn't be surprised, it can screw up the entire game. (I'm an LSAT teacher/tutor)

You should always verify how you diagrammed the rules/conditions by re-reading the game and comparing the rules to what you wrote before heading into the questions (takes around 20-30 seconds max to do) in order to catch and fix possible errors before they become fatal.

As for your second sentence, I think I addressed that in the other thread where you commented about what "If and only if" dictates. You need to fix your logical thought about that.