PT 34 LG 4?? Forum

[bee's vision]

Did anybody else struggle with the last game in PT 34? Here's where I got confused:

If L is at S, then both N and P are at R

If N is at R, then so is O

If P is at R, the both K and O are at S

Maybe I am just burnt out but I cannot figure out where O is supposed to be if L is at S. Don't these last two rules contradict each other? What am I missing? Please Help!

P.S. it just occurred to me that maybe it just means that L cannot be at S? Still not sure.

[Cambridge LSAT]

That's correct; L cannot be assigned to S. Since LS leads to LR in both chains you can create, L must be assigned to R. This is an uncommon inference for an In/Out Grouping game.

[2011Law]

Just wanted to say that PT 34 Section 4 (Games) shit all over my existence. Spent 4 minutes on game 1 until I realized I didn't understand any of it. Total for that section: 8 right... fml.

Also, props to Cambridge, that is one baller diagram. I didn't see that paradox when I did it.

[rossrobert]

How do you know when the contrapositive should be flipped and negated vs what was done in this game where the contrapositive if i understand correctly was flipped with their clinics, taken as follows: Js-->Kr Contra: Ks-->Jr

[Cambridge LSAT]

Generally, when the game involves selecting a number of variables from a larger pool, you should use crossed-out letters or tildes to represent variables not being selected. When the game involves placing each variable into exactly one of two groups, as in this case, subscripts provide a clearer picture of the interactions. You can still use negative notations, but you may find them to be inefficient. For instance, ~JR → KR, is not as informative as JS → KR. The process of creating the contrapositive is the same, but when there are two values, neither one of which is inherently positive or negative, negating a variable with one subscript entails changing that variable's subscript to the other one.