Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

uh1999
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 11:20 am

Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby uh1999 » Wed Feb 01, 2012 4:34 pm

For those who have the Power Score LG Bible, turn to page 159.

I posed the question, because I would not have diagramed the following as a conditional statetment:

"Each rock classic is immediately preceded on the CD by a new composition."

R ----> NR

I would have diagramed it as a block:

[NR]

Since the former is correct, is it safe to assume that whenever I see the word "each" that I can treat it as a premise indicator is similar situations?

I'll commit this to memory despite the fact that I don't get it.

User avatar
suspicious android
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby suspicious android » Wed Feb 01, 2012 5:18 pm

They diagrammed that conditionally because you don't necessarily have to have an NR block like you wrote out. You could have N with something else, which an NR block would not seem to allow.

bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby bp shinners » Wed Feb 01, 2012 5:33 pm

Yea, a similar situation comes up in the game with the cruise liner that's making stops in a bunch of tropical locations.

It's definitely conditional, for the reason SA said.

uh1999
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 11:20 am

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby uh1999 » Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:37 pm

Thanks for the reply.

My obvious follow-on question would be, "How could the rule be reworded to warrant an [NR] block?"

I am thinking that if R occurred only once, then the [NR] would be warranted.
Last edited by uh1999 on Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bdeebs
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:54 pm

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby bdeebs » Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:51 pm

"Each rock classic is immediately preceded by a new composition, and each new composition immediately precedes a rock classic on the CD."

User avatar
bdeebs
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:54 pm

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby bdeebs » Wed Feb 01, 2012 8:03 pm

On a side note, if I were tackling this game and interpreted the rule to mean [NR], I would quickly discover that this would be impossible because there are only 7 slots, and the [NR] rule would require an even number of slots. Then I'd be forced to go back and reexamine that rule. My 2 cents on your original question, I essentially equate "each A is B" to mean "If A occurs, then B". I am by no means an expert, so perhaps there is a situation where this is not the case, but I'd be surprised to find it in the logic games section.

uh1999
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 11:20 am

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby uh1999 » Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:40 pm

Got it. Thanks.

User avatar
bgdddymtty
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby bgdddymtty » Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:57 pm

To answer your original question, yes, "each" indicates the sufficient condition in a conditional statement. Each = every = every time = whenever = when = if.

User avatar
lovejopd
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:00 pm

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby lovejopd » Wed Feb 08, 2012 5:22 pm

suspicious android wrote:They diagrammed that conditionally because you don't necessarily have to have an NR block like you wrote out. You could have N with something else, which an NR block would not seem to allow.

Hey, can you elaborate on "not necessarily an NR block"?

This expression really threw me off. I interpreted 'R is immediately preceded by New Composition ' as 'New Composition is right before R'. I guess I am dead wrong. Are you saying that R and New Composition only have a relative position Not a block? What's the function of the word"immediately"?
I am not sure about the difference between R --> NR vs. [NR]... :? Maybe N can appear without R?...
Thanks~

User avatar
suspicious android
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby suspicious android » Wed Feb 08, 2012 6:26 pm

lovejopd wrote:This expression really threw me off. I interpreted 'R is immediately preceded by New Composition ' as 'New Composition is right before R'. I guess I am dead wrong. Are you saying that R and New Composition only have a relative position Not a block? What's the function of the word"immediately"?
I am not sure about the difference between R --> NR vs. [NR]... :? Maybe N can appear without R?...
Thanks~


Yeah, I think you've got it. I don't have a copy of the game available, but if I recall correctly, the variables don't have to occur at all, or might occur multiple times? That's the key. If you knew without a doubt that there would be exactly one R, and one N, then essentially your diagram would be correct (NR). But, since you might have multiple N's, it's possible to get something like NxRN (x being whatever other variable appear in this game).

Now you might be able to get away with either version without confusion, but since sometimes you need to be able to make a distinction between the two versions, its useful to be able to do so. I like to have an 'NR' block mean that those two variables will always occur directly together.

User avatar
lovejopd
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:00 pm

Re: Is the Word "Each" a Premise Indicator?

Postby lovejopd » Wed Feb 08, 2012 6:50 pm

suspicious android wrote:
lovejopd wrote:This expression really threw me off. I interpreted 'R is immediately preceded by New Composition ' as 'New Composition is right before R'. I guess I am dead wrong. Are you saying that R and New Composition only have a relative position Not a block? What's the function of the word"immediately"?
I am not sure about the difference between R --> NR vs. [NR]... :? Maybe N can appear without R?...
Thanks~


Yeah, I think you've got it. I don't have a copy of the game available, but if I recall correctly, the variables don't have to occur at all, or might occur multiple times? That's the key. If you knew without a doubt that there would be exactly one R, and one N, then essentially your diagram would be correct (NR). But, since you might have multiple N's, it's possible to get something like NxRN (x being whatever other variable appear in this game).

Now you might be able to get away with either version without confusion, but since sometimes you need to be able to make a distinction between the two versions, its useful to be able to do so. I like to have an 'NR' block mean that those two variables will always occur directly together.


Crystal Clear! Yeah, it is fundamentally different! Thx!

1. NR(as a block)
1) NR must appear if N or R appear

vs.

2. R-->NR
1) No N or R occurs
2) Only N(s) occurs without R
3) One NR
3) multiple NR + (possible multiple N)

:lol:




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: favabeansoup, Google [Bot], yellowavcable and 11 guests