Top Law Schools

It stated:

People who enjoy comedians who display disrespect in their acts do place a high value on respect for others.

If you negate that, it would contradict the first premise, correct?

If not, is it due to the ambiguity of the term people? Does people imply each and every person or does it constitute a majority of all people?

If you do not place a high value of respect fir others you do not enjoy comedians who dismay disrespect in their acts

-does not include all ppl

I don't understand where you constructed that conditional statement from?

Woah at my typos lol but it's simple form granted I interjected "you"

If x > y
If not y > not x


If not x> y
If not y > x


If x > not y
If y > not x


If not x > not y
If y > x

People who enjoy comedians who display disrespect in their acts do place a high value on respect for others.

To negate this:

People who enjoy comedians who display disrespect in their acts do not place a high value on respect for others.

And if we were to have this in the argument, the argument collapses.

CREATION wrote:People who enjoy comedians who display disrespect in their acts do place a high value on respect for others.

To negate this:

People who enjoy comedians who display disrespect in their acts do not place a high value on respect for others.

And if we were to have this in the argument, the argument collapses.

You are negating incorrectly.

If x > not y
Negated: if y > not x

Flip and negate both

Br3v wrote:
You are negating incorrectly.

If x > not y
Negated: if y > not x

Flip and negate both

I am not negating incorrectly.

X= people who enjoy comedians who display disrespect

y= place a high value on respect for others

If x > y
If not y > not x

CREATION wrote:

Br3v wrote:
You are negating incorrectly.

If x > not y
Negated: if y > not x

Flip and negate both

I am not negating incorrectly.

Ok then stop asking and carry on

Br3v wrote:You are negating incorrectly.

If x > not y
Negated: if y > not x

Flip and negate both

That's not the way to negate a conditional, you're showing the contra positive.

Br3v wrote:

You are negating incorrectly.

If x > not y
Negated: if y > not x

Flip and negate both

And to make matters worse, you are the one negating incorrectly. To negate a conditional statement, for example, A -> B You would not do what you are suggesting.

You would state even if A, not necessarily B.

Br3v wrote:

CREATION wrote:

Br3v wrote:
You are negating incorrectly.

If x > not y
Negated: if y > not x

Flip and negate both

I am not negating incorrectly.

Ok then stop asking and carry on

Don't contribute to an LSAT prep forum with bad advice. I will call you out when you are dead wrong.

CREATION wrote:

Br3v wrote:

CREATION wrote:

Br3v wrote:
You are negating incorrectly.

If x > not y
Negated: if y > not x

Flip and negate both

I am not negating incorrectly.

Ok then stop asking and carry on

Don't contribute to an LSAT prep forum with bad advice. I will call you out when you are dead wrong.

If you contribute to an LSAT prep forum with bad advice, then I will call you out

If I do not call you out, you did not contribute to an LSAT prep forum with bad advice

Hope this helps

I do not understand why you are ruining my thread by showing that you can use contrapositives. Do you not know what the negation technique is?

I would like for someone to confirm for me in my original post whether that would be a necessary assumption, with the rewording of A.

Br3v wrote:X= people who enjoy comedians who display disrespect

y= place a high value on respect for others

If x > y
If not y > not x

You are wrong.
negation != contrapositive

Creation's negation is correct.. although he has the same issue I did when I tried using the negation thing to test answers... sometimes the wording in a negation is very ambiguous and, personally, tends to be less helpful than the original statement

Just to be clear... the statement in your OP IS the negative... because answer choice A is: "People who enjoy comedians who display disrespect in their acts do not place a high value on respect for others." I can't tell if that was just a typo in your OP or if that was your confusion... Answer Choice A is pretty much a contradiction of the first sentence so cannot be true.

Yes i understand that in its current form, answer choice A is not a necessary assumption. My question is what if we were given answer choice a in its negated form as an answer choice. As you stated, if we did not have that, it would contradict the stimulus. Isnt it necessary that people hold respect for others and enjoy the specified comedy?