LR struggle Forum

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
Post Reply
eli2015

New
Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 7:03 pm

LR struggle

Post by eli2015 » Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:40 pm

I am really struggling with the simplest of tasks. I can not select the sufficient and necessary properly. So, for example in my ps LRB the conditional statement was

"Suspects shall be persumed innocent until proven guilty"

I diagrammed that as

I ---> /G
contrapositive as G ---> /I.

The book's answer is
/I ----> G
contrapositive as /G ----> I

Is my diagram correct as well as the book's? Because if not then I am really having a hard time with this. Is there any drill to improve on this concept, or videos/ explanations to help me understand?

User avatar
leslieknope

Silver
Posts: 1114
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:53 pm

Re: LR struggle

Post by leslieknope » Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:43 pm

Try rephrasing it to if-then form.

Presumed innocent until proven guilty=If they have not been proven guilty, they will be presumed innocent. Which then translates to

/PG--> I

or

/I-->PG

User avatar
nlee10

Gold
Posts: 3015
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:00 pm

Re: LR struggle

Post by nlee10 » Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:54 pm

leslieknope wrote:Try rephrasing it to if-then form.

Presumed innocent until proven guilty=If they have not been proven guilty, they will be presumed innocent. Which then translates to

/PG--> I

or

/I-->PG
+1
Until is a negate sufficient keyword so:
IF Not proven guilty, then presumed innocent.

and the contrapositive:
IF Not presumed innocent, then proven guilty.

eli2015

New
Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 7:03 pm

Re: LR struggle

Post by eli2015 » Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:56 pm

leslieknope wrote:Try rephrasing it to if-then form.

Presumed innocent until proven guilty=If they have not been proven guilty, they will be presumed innocent. Which then translates to

/PG--> I

or

/I-->PG
So then my diagram is incorrect?

eli2015

New
Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 7:03 pm

Re: LR struggle

Post by eli2015 » Fri Jan 16, 2015 8:00 pm

nlee10 wrote:
leslieknope wrote:Try rephrasing it to if-then form.

Presumed innocent until proven guilty=If they have not been proven guilty, they will be presumed innocent. Which then translates to

/PG--> I

or

/I-->PG
+1
Until is a negate sufficient keyword so:
IF Not proven guilty, then presumed innocent.

and the contrapositive:
IF Not presumed innocent, then proven guilty.
I don't think the LRB by PowerScore is that good. It does not provide me with sufficient explanation for this process.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


User avatar
leslieknope

Silver
Posts: 1114
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:53 pm

Re: LR struggle

Post by leslieknope » Fri Jan 16, 2015 8:16 pm

eli2015 wrote:
leslieknope wrote:Try rephrasing it to if-then form.

Presumed innocent until proven guilty=If they have not been proven guilty, they will be presumed innocent. Which then translates to

/PG--> I

or

/I-->PG
So then my diagram is incorrect?
Yeah, your diagram is essentially saying "if a suspect is presumed innocent, then they will not be proven guilty." It's a mistaken reversal- you have the sufficient and the necessary condition flipped.

You should consider picking up Manhattan's LR guide. I studied for my first take with the LRB and picked up the Manhattan guide a few days ago, and so far I find Manhattan much more intuitive and helpful as far as figuring out the thought process you should go through.

eli2015

New
Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 7:03 pm

Re: LR struggle

Post by eli2015 » Fri Jan 16, 2015 8:22 pm

leslieknope wrote:
eli2015 wrote:
leslieknope wrote:Try rephrasing it to if-then form.

Presumed innocent until proven guilty=If they have not been proven guilty, they will be presumed innocent. Which then translates to

/PG--> I

or

/I-->PG
So then my diagram is incorrect?
Yeah, your diagram is essentially saying "if a suspect is presumed innocent, then they will not be proven guilty." It's a mistaken reversal- you have the sufficient and the necessary condition flipped.

You should consider picking up Manhattan's LR guide. I studied for my first take with the LRB and picked up the Manhattan guide a few days ago, and so far I find Manhattan much more intuitive and helpful as far as figuring out the thought process you should go through.
Thank you, I see my mistake now. Thank you for the recommendation as well, I actually ordered it a few days ago after seeing that everyone said that it is way better than PS, I am just studying with the LRB for now until I receive my copy.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Post Reply

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”