Post
by LSAT Hacks (Graeme) » Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:11 pm
Principle Application questions often involve formal logic. Your job is to find out exactly what the rule says. Then you need to find the answer that obeys that rule.
Often, it will be a fact that meets the sufficient condition.
--------------------
Example
--------------------
It's always easier with an example. Check out LSAT 66, section IV, question 16.
The principle says that employees shouldn't do anything to make customers hate their clients.
The application is that an employee shouldn't try to talk customers into buying, if they've said they're not interested.
A diagram for the principle: Make hate --> Don't do
The application says: They said no, but try to sell --> Don't do
This is actually a bit like a sufficient assumption question. We need to show that if they say no, and the employee persists, then that will make the customer hate the company.
Said no, persist --> Customers hates the company --> Don't do it
(I never draw diagrams like this - I'm using full words so this explanation is easier to follow)
Once I figured out what to look for, I just skimmed the answers until I got to C, which said that if you keep trying to sell to someone, they'll hate your client. I skipped B, because it just said 'Some'. Useless.
---------------------
Hope that helps. I'd be happy to walk you through another question if you post the test + question and section number. We also have a few lessons on how principle questions are sometimes similar to SA questions in 7Sage's LR mini-course.