PT 59 Second logic game, the substitute rule question

User avatar
sdwarrior403
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 8:13 pm

PT 59 Second logic game, the substitute rule question

Postby sdwarrior403 » Mon Sep 17, 2012 4:26 pm

We are looking to replace the two-part rule of H not being first and H being before the K. I expected the new rule to bring up G instead of K since KG are in a block.

When you diagram it, you get...

- H2 -----> G/M - H - M/G

Since the other rules told us that GK forms a block, we would encounter this...

GK - H - M

But one of the other rules told me that M has to be one of the first 3. So this could not happen. Is this what allows us to infer that we must conceive the condition as this...

- H2 -----> M - H - GK

??????

User avatar
05062014
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:05 pm

Re: PT 59 Second logic game, the substitute rule question

Postby 05062014 » Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:28 pm

I got this question right yesterday and gave myself a pat on the back. If H = 2 then it need not be between m and g... But if not, it must be. Perfectly capturing what we needed here because we know M = 1-3 only. If H is not 2 then it cannot be 1 because M-H-G ...and it also must be after M (meaning 3, 4 or 5). I don't have the game infront of me but I got the general idea of what we needed to find from the other answer choices, surprisingly. They either were too restrictive or too expansive but this conditional and the implications of it were just right

User avatar
sdwarrior403
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 8:13 pm

Re: PT 59 Second logic game, the substitute rule question

Postby sdwarrior403 » Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:50 pm

abdistotle wrote:If H is not 2 then it cannot be 1 because M-H-G ...and it also must be after M (meaning 3, 4 or 5).

The bolded part is the direct concern of my post. How have you ascertained whether we have M-H-G or G-H-M?

You must have considered the possibility of the latter option. Is it true that you did consider it, yet knew that it would force M outside of the first three spaces, which is due to K being a block with G.

Thank you

User avatar
05062014
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:05 pm

Re: PT 59 Second logic game, the substitute rule question

Postby 05062014 » Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:09 pm

What is your question, exactly?

M must be 1-3 + GK block + IL block.

If H does not equal 2; then our options are very limited... M would be pushed out of the first 3, like you said if it was GK-H-M. So, we know it must not be that way, it must be M-H-GK, period. Then we know H = 3 4 5 only

User avatar
sdwarrior403
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 8:13 pm

Re: PT 59 Second logic game, the substitute rule question

Postby sdwarrior403 » Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:46 pm

abdistotle wrote:What is your question, exactly?

M must be 1-3 + GK block + IL block.

If H does not equal 2; then our options are very limited... M would be pushed out of the first 3, like you said if it was GK-H-M. So, we know it must not be that way, it must be M-H-GK, period. Then we know H = 3 4 5 only

My question, which is answered by this post I am quoting, was why the G-H-M order was not considered as being consistent with what this answer choice dictated. I now see that you did consider that possibility, but realized it was not consistent with the rest of the rules.

User avatar
05062014
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:05 pm

Re: PT 59 Second logic game, the substitute rule question

Postby 05062014 » Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:53 pm

I am glad you have ascertained this




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: PantoroB and 9 guests