PT 70, Game 2, language confusion (is this an exhaustive list)? Forum

[dontsaywhatyoumean]

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsa ... -3-game-2/
(7Sage explanation above)

For question 8, "Which one of the following is a possible selection of employees for the team?", am I supposed to interpret that as the only employees selected for the team? Meaning everyone else is not selected.

I don't see how to arrive at the correct answer unless you assume the list is exhaustive, and everyone not mentioned is in the out group.

I thought they're usually more precise with language though, and would say something like, "a complete list", rather than just a "possible selection".

Thanks

[34iplaw]

It's a possible scenario. That's all it's asking for. Be weary with the word exhaustive. I think exhaustive in regards to the LSAT typically would mean a list of everyone that could be selected, and, barring a variable that can never be in, that would just be a list of every variable.

What you describe is the right way to interpret it, but I don't think it's an assumption. The language isn't all that vague. The key phrase is "a possible selection"

[dontsaywhatyoumean]

It's a possible scenario. That's all it's asking for. Be weary with the word exhaustive. I think exhaustive in regards to the LSAT typically would mean a list of everyone that could be selected, and, barring a variable that can never be in, that would just be a list of every variable.

What you describe is the right way to interpret it, but I don't think it's an assumption. The language isn't all that vague. The key phrase is "a possible selection"

In that case though, while answer B is correct (the true correct choice), C is also correct, because answer C is possible if you make one more selection (C is not correct by itself though). So answer C still provides a possible scenario of a selection, just not an entirely limited one.

By exhaustive I just mean no other selections are included, regardless of whether they could be or not according to the rules.

I only moved on to assuming they meant a selection limited to those mentioned because otherwise there were at least two correct answers.

[34iplaw]

It's a possible scenario. That's all it's asking for. Be weary with the word exhaustive. I think exhaustive in regards to the LSAT typically would mean a list of everyone that could be selected, and, barring a variable that can never be in, that would just be a list of every variable.

What you describe is the right way to interpret it, but I don't think it's an assumption. The language isn't all that vague. The key phrase is "a possible selection"

In that case though, while answer B is correct (the true correct choice), C is also correct, because answer C is possible if you make one more selection (C is not correct by itself though). So answer C still provides a possible scenario of a selection, just not an entirely limited one.

By exhaustive I just mean no other selections are included, regardless of whether they could be or not according to the rules.

I only moved on to assuming they meant a selection limited to those mentioned because otherwise there were at least two correct answers.

I assume there is some rule there that makes C incorrect. I'll take a look at the game when I get my overpriced coffee and get home. I'm sure I have the game somewhere.

[dontsaywhatyoumean]

It's a possible scenario. That's all it's asking for. Be weary with the word exhaustive. I think exhaustive in regards to the LSAT typically would mean a list of everyone that could be selected, and, barring a variable that can never be in, that would just be a list of every variable.

What you describe is the right way to interpret it, but I don't think it's an assumption. The language isn't all that vague. The key phrase is "a possible selection"

In that case though, while answer B is correct (the true correct choice), C is also correct, because answer C is possible if you make one more selection (C is not correct by itself though). So answer C still provides a possible scenario of a selection, just not an entirely limited one.

By exhaustive I just mean no other selections are included, regardless of whether they could be or not according to the rules.

I only moved on to assuming they meant a selection limited to those mentioned because otherwise there were at least two correct answers.

I assume there is some rule there that makes C incorrect. I'll take a look at the game when I get my overpriced coffee and get home. I'm sure I have the game somewhere.

There is if you assume that it's a limited selection, otherwise I don't see it (I did get everything right on this game, but I suppose that doesn't necessarily mean I diagrammed everything well).

I do see 7Sage diagrammed it differently, so possibly that's it, but it seems like it was just a visual thing.


Thank you very much, I really appreciate it. I don't really understand this otherwise.

[34iplaw]

It's a possible scenario. That's all it's asking for. Be weary with the word exhaustive. I think exhaustive in regards to the LSAT typically would mean a list of everyone that could be selected, and, barring a variable that can never be in, that would just be a list of every variable.

What you describe is the right way to interpret it, but I don't think it's an assumption. The language isn't all that vague. The key phrase is "a possible selection"

In that case though, while answer B is correct (the true correct choice), C is also correct, because answer C is possible if you make one more selection (C is not correct by itself though). So answer C still provides a possible scenario of a selection, just not an entirely limited one.

By exhaustive I just mean no other selections are included, regardless of whether they could be or not according to the rules.

I only moved on to assuming they meant a selection limited to those mentioned because otherwise there were at least two correct answers.

I assume there is some rule there that makes C incorrect. I'll take a look at the game when I get my overpriced coffee and get home. I'm sure I have the game somewhere.

There is if you assume that it's a limited selection, otherwise I don't see it (I did get everything right on this game, but I suppose that doesn't necessarily mean I diagrammed everything well).

I do see 7Sage diagrammed it differently, so possibly that's it, but it seems like it was just a visual thing.

Thank you very much, I really appreciate it. I don't really understand this otherwise.

I think the wording gave you trouble then, as you understand the issue.

C is incorrect because Thomson isn't selected in this scenario. That's still a violation of the second rule Schmidt -> Paine & Thomson. If they were insinuating more could be selected, they would be very explicit that a partial list would suffice.

[dontsaywhatyoumean]

Okay.

Thank you very much for the clarification.