Diagram Flashcards

Question

Diagram No man wears perfume

Answer 1

man \> -perfume- no always negates the second term

Answer 2

A \> -B- no always negates the second term

Answer 3

Diagram and Contra If the professional wrestler is in the ring, then he is wearing knee pads or a spandex body suit, but not both - - contra If the wrester is wearing neither knee pads nor a spandex suit, or if he is wearing both knee pads and a spandex body suit, then he is not in the ring

Answer 4

The only deduction you can make is if two most statements share a suffiient condition, in which case a some connection is produced - - 1. Most NFL players are incredibly fast 2. Most NFL players weigh over 250 pounds - Some of those who are incredibly fast weigh over 250 pounds

Answer 5

The only deduction you can make is if two most statements share a suffiient condition, in which case a some connection is produced - - 1. Most NFL players are incredibly fast 2. Most NFL players weigh over 250 pounds - Some of those who are incredibly fast weigh over 250 pounds

Answer 6

Some people who perform high-wire acts without life insurance - With All + Some statements, the shared term must be the sufficient condition of the all statement

Answer 7

To make a deduction with All + Some statements, the shared term must be the suffifient condition of the all statement If all A's are B's and Some A's are C's, then Some B's are C's

Answer 8

If all A's are B's and Some A's are C's, then Some B's are C's To make a deduction with All + Some statements, the shared term must be the sufficient condition of the all statement

Answer 9

There are two ways of combining All + Most statements, - If the necessary condition of the Most statement is the sufficient condition of the All statement, then you can produce a Most statement as the conclusion ---- If they share the same sufficient condition, then you can only produce a some statement

Answer 10

There are two ways of combining All + Most statements, - If the necessary condition of the Most statement is the sufficient condition of the All statement, then you can produce a Most statement as the conclusion ---- If they share the same sufficient condition, then you can only produce a some statement

Answer 11

If they share the same sufficient condition, then you can only produce a some statement - If the necessary condition of the Most statement is the sufficient condition of the All statement, then you can produce a Most statement as the conclusion

Answer 12

Some of those who wear skinny jeans are 12 year old girls -------------- When combining All + Most: If they share the same sufficient condition, then you can only produce a some statement -------------- If the necessary condition of the Most statement is the sufficient condition of the All statement, then you can produce a Most statement as the conclusion

Answer 13

The only time you can derive a conclusion from two most statements is when they share the sufficient condition -- If most A's are B's and most A's are C's, then some B's are C's

Answer 14

The only time you can derive a conclusion from two most statements is when they share the sufficient condition -- If most A's are B's and most A's are C's, then some B's are C's

Answer 15

Two Some statements can never lead to a valid conclusion also A Most and a Some can never lead to a valid conclusion

Answer 16

A Most and a Some can never lead to a valid conclusion also Two Some statements can never lead to a valid conclusion

Answer 17

In Ordering games, a Principle of Distribution restricts how many slots a player can fill or how many players can be assigned to a slot

Answer 18

In Ordering games, a Principle of Distribution restricts how many slots a player can fill or how many players can be assigned to a slot

Answer 19

Family #1, Must Be or PROVE Family - - Must Be True - Main Point - Point at Issue - Method of Reasoning - Flaw in the Reasoning - Parallel Reasoning - The First Question Family is based on the principle of using the information in the stimulus to prove that one of the answer choices must be true - Stimulus accepted as given while the answer choices are “under suspicion,” and the information in the stimulus is used to prove one of them. - Rules 1. The information in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present, and you will further weaken the argument in some way. - 2. The answer choices are accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Your task is to determine which answer choice best attacks the argument in the stimulus.

Answer 20

Family #2, Help Family - - Assumption - Justify the Conclusion - Strengthen/Support - Resolve the Paradox - The Second Question Family is based on the principle of assisting or helping the author’s argument or statement in some way, whether by revealing an assumption of the argument, by resolving a paradox, or in some other fashion - Rules 1. The information in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present, and depending on the question, you will help shore up the argument in some way. - 2. The answer choices are accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Your task is to determine which answer choice best meets the question posed in the stem.

Answer 21

Family #3, Hurt Family - consists of one question type: Weaken - Compared to the Second Question Family, the Help family, the only difference between the diagrams is that the third family diagram has a bar across the arrow. This bar signifies a negative: instead of strengthening or helping the argument, you attack or hurt the argument. - Rules: 1. The information in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present, and you will further weaken the argument in some way. - 2. The answer choices are accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Your task is to determine which answer choice best attacks the argument in the stimulus.

Answer 22

Family #4, Disprove Family - consists of one question type: Cannot Be True - The 4th question family is based on the principle that you must use the information in the stimulus to prove that one of the answer choices cannot occur. Compared to the First Question Family, the only difference in the diagram is that the Fourth Family diagram has a bar across the arrow. Again, this bar signifies a negative - Rules 1. You must accept the stimulus information—even if it contains an error of reasoning—and use it to prove that one of the answer choices cannot occur. - 2. Any information in an answer choice that does not appear either directly in the stimulus or as a combination of items in the stimulus will be incorrect. The correct answer choice will directly disagree with the stimulus or a consequence of the stimulus.

Answer 23

Family #1, Must Be or PROVE Family - - Must Be True - Main Point - Point at Issue - Method of Reasoning - Flaw in the Reasoning - Parallel Reasoning - The First Question Family is based on the principle of using the information in the stimulus to prove that one of the answer choices must be true - Stimulus accepted as given while the answer choices are “under suspicion,” and the information in the stimulus is used to prove one of them. - Rules 1. The information in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present, and you will further weaken the argument in some way. - 2. The answer choices are accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Your task is to determine which answer choice best attacks the argument in the stimulus.

Answer 24

Family #2, Help Family - - Assumption - Justify the Conclusion - Strengthen/Support - Resolve the Paradox - The Second Question Family is based on the principle of assisting or helping the author’s argument or statement in some way, whether by revealing an assumption of the argument, by resolving a paradox, or in some other fashion - Rules 1. The information in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present, and depending on the question, you will help shore up the argument in some way. - 2. The answer choices are accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Your task is to determine which answer choice best meets the question posed in the stem

Answer 25

Family #3, Hurt Family - consists of one question type: Weaken - Compared to the Second Question Family, the Help family, the only difference between the diagrams is that the third family diagram has a bar across the arrow. This bar signifies a negative: instead of strengthening or helping the argument, you attack or hurt the argument. - Rules: 1. The information in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present, and you will further weaken the argument in some way. - 2. The answer choices are accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Your task is to determine which answer choice best attacks the argument in the stimulus.

Answer 26

Family #4, Disprove Family - consists of one question type: Cannot Be True - The 4th question family is based on the principle that you must use the information in the stimulus to prove that one of the answer choices cannot occur. Compared to the First Question Family, the only difference in the diagram is that the Fourth Family diagram has a bar across the arrow. Again, this bar signifies a negative - Rules 1. You must accept the stimulus information—even if it contains an error of reasoning—and use it to prove that one of the answer choices cannot occur. - 2. Any information in an answer choice that does not appear either directly in the stimulus or as a combination of items in the stimulus will be incorrect. The correct answer choice will directly disagree with the stimulus or a consequence of the stimulus.

Answer 27

The First Question Family (Must Be or PROVE Family)is based on the principle of using the information in the stimulus to prove that one of the answer choices must be true - - Must Be True - Main Point - Point at Issue - Method of Reasoning - Flaw in the Reasoning - Parallel Reasoning - Stimulus accepted as given while the answer choices are “under suspicion,” and the information in the stimulus is used to prove one of them. - Rules 1. The information in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present, and you will further weaken the argument in some way. - 2. The answer choices are accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Your task is to determine which answer choice best attacks the argument in the stimulus.

Answer 28

The Second Question Family (Help Family) is based on the principle of assisting or helping the author’s argument or statement in some way, whether by revealing an assumption of the argument, by resolving a paradox, or in some other fashion - - Assumption - Justify the Conclusion - Strengthen/Support - Resolve the Paradox - The Second Question Family is based on the principle of assisting or helping the author’s argument or statement in some way, whether by revealing an assumption of the argument, by resolving a paradox, or in some other fashion - Rules 1. The information in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present, and depending on the question, you will help shore up the argument in some way. - 2. The answer choices are accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Your task is to determine which answer choice best meets the question posed in the stem

Answer 29

The Third Question Family (Hurt Family) consists of only one question type—Weaken and it asks you to attack the author’s argument. - consists of one question type: Weaken - Compared to the Second Question Family, the Help family, the only difference between the diagrams is that the third family diagram has a bar across the arrow. This bar signifies a negative: instead of strengthening or helping the argument, you attack or hurt the argument. - Rules: 1. The information in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present, and you will further weaken the argument in some way. - 2. The answer choices are accepted as given, even if they include “new” information. Your task is to determine which answer choice best attacks the argument in the stimulus.

Answer 30

The Fourth Question Family (Hurt Family) consists of only one question type—Cannot Be True. As such, this question family is based on the principle that you must use the information in the stimulus to prove that one of the answer choices cannot occur. - consists of one question type: Cannot Be True - The 4th question family is based on the principle that you must use the information in the stimulus to prove that one of the answer choices cannot occur. Compared to the First Question Family, the only difference in the diagram is that the Fourth Family diagram has a bar across the arrow. Again, this bar signifies a negative - Rules 1. You must accept the stimulus information—even if it contains an error of reasoning—and use it to prove that one of the answer choices cannot occur. - 2. Any information in an answer choice that does not appear either directly in the stimulus or as a combination of items in the stimulus will be incorrect. The correct answer choice will directly disagree with the stimulus or a consequence of the stimulus.

Answer 31

1. Look for words that indicate Premises (since, because) and Conclusions (therefore, thus, hence, so, it follows that) - 2. Look for words that indicate a Shift in Attitude (but, however) - 3. Look for Evaluative Statements that indicate the author's attitude 4. Why Test

Answer 32

Quantity Indicators - all every most many some several few sole only not all none

Answer 33

must will always not always probably likely should would not necessarily could rarely never

Answer 34

Introduced by sufficient and necessary words such as: if...then, when, all, every, and only, where both elements are positive or both elements are negative

Answer 35

Introduced by conditional statements where exactly one of the terms is negative, or by statements using words such as “no” and “none” that imply the two variables cannot “go together.” - Example Statement: No X’s are Y’s

Answer 36

row is horizontal - column is vertical

Answer 37

Vertical. Think of roman columns

Answer 38

Horizontal Columns are Vertical

Answer 39

One person could drive three times with the other three driving once 3+1+1+1=6 - The other possiblity is Two people drive twice and two people drive once 2+2+1+1

Answer 40

2 possibiltiies 3 on one day and 1 on the remaining 4 3 1 1 1 1 = 7 or 2 on two days and 1 on the remaining three 2 2 1 1 1 = 7

Answer 41

2 2 1 1 1 One girl will get her own locker BG, BG, B, B, G

Answer 42

Most - a majority = 50% + The most can be a plurality = ie more than any other

Answer 43

Some is reciprical = create a line most is not... its an arrow

Answer 44

Cant get anything from this

Answer 45

nothing if it were Alls you could use the transative A \> B B \> C A \> C

Answer 46

Some B's are C's

Answer 47

1) Uncertain Use of a Term or Concept 2) Ad Hominem - flawed argument attacks the person (or source) instead of the argument they advance 3) Circular Reasoning - the author assumes as true what is supposed to be proved 4) Errors of Conditional Reasoning 5) Mistaken Cause and Effect (temporal relationship, correlation, alternate cause, reversal) 6) Straw Man - when an author attempts to attack an opponent’s position by ignoring the actual statements made by the opposing speaker and instead distorts and refashions the argument, making it weaker in the process 7) Lack of Relevant Evidence for the Conclusion 8) Internal Contradiction 9) Appeal Fallacies a. Authority b. Popular Opinion/Appeal to Numbers c. Emotion 10. Survey Errors 11. Exceptional Case/Overgeneralization 12. Errors of Composition and Division 13. False Analogy 14. False Dilemma 15. Errors in the Use of Evidence 16. Time Shift Errors

Answer 48

Applies when variables involved in blocks/not-blocks are placed in a limited number of spaces resulting in the rigid allocation of the variables that can be exploited. EX: Rule: B\_\_B\_\_B and only 5 spaces available...so it would be, B1, B3, B5

Answer 49

When members of two separate variable sets are both assigned into a fixed number of spaces, there will be an overlap between the groups IF the sum of the two groups is greater than the total number of spaces. EX: There are three chairs in a classroom. Two of the chairs are green and two boys sit in the chairs. SO--Two variable sets are green chairs and boys...SUM of these two groups is 4, TOTAL number of spaces is 3 chairs...MEANS--at least 1 boy will sit in 1 green chair.

Answer 50

J -\> H M -\> H

Answer 51

A) it implies that the two cannot be together . A) If G speaks at the fundraiser then H cannot speak G \> =H= contra is H \> =G= - - - - this is opposed to B B) If G does not speak at the fundraiser, H speaks =G= -\> H No G implies H. But we do not know whether G can be with H. No G is simply sufficient to know H is in

Answer 52

R\>P -\> R\>P/Q contra Q\>R -\> P/Q\>R

Answer 53

Only when the Neccesarry condition is itself negative No A's are B's = A \> ~B If You are an A you are not a B If not A then B situation of One or the Other be careful not to be tricked by single negation of some necessary conditions.. work it out

Answer 54

The double not arrow is a shorthand method of showing that two elements cannot be in the same group together. A --\> ~B can be expressed A \<--|--\> B because the original statement and its contrapositive (B --\> ~A) rule out the possibility that A and B can be in the same group. This is not true of ~A --\> B. This statement and its cp (~B --\> A) indicate only that if one is absent, the other must be there. They do not rule out the possibility that both A and B can be in the same group. the negated term has to be the neccessary condition to have a double not arrow, and all the double not arrow is, is a simplification of writing the original diagram and its contrapositive

Answer 55

E a double arrow between Not A and Not F tells us that the two conditions - absent A and absent F - cannot simultaneously occur. Therefore, either A or F, or both, must be present

Answer 56

J (double arrow) ~K

Answer 57

J (double arrow) ~K

Answer 58

B) This conditional relationship provides that at least one of F or H must be selected in any valid template

Answer 59

F --\> G~ and ~G --\> F

Answer 60

C F --\> ~G and ~G --\> F C) Greg will not join the team if Frans joins the team, and Frans will join if Greg does not

Answer 61

Q \> R R\> ~P P is negated and Necessary, -- Double not arrow R\<--II--\>P Q\<--II--\>P

Answer 62

~R --\> S produces a ~R ~S - If R is not selected then S is selected + If S is not selected then R is selected = Therefore there is no situation in which they are both not selected. Either onee or both are not selected.

Answer 63

M --\> O One of them must be hired since there is only one space in the out group. The original statement signifies that it is possible for one (M) not to be hired; however, if O isnt hired, M isnt hired, which would violate the game's setup. O must always be hired

Answer 64

If you are not T, then you are not V (T and V both negative)' You can, of course take the contrapositive of this diagram and force both terms to be positive:

Answer 65

Some X’s are Y’s

Answer 66

Some W’s are not Z’s same as Not all W’s are Z’s “Some are not” can be defined as at least one is not, possibly all are not. Thus, if I say, “Some of my friends are not present,” it could be true that none of my friends are present. One of the most popular ways to introduce the idea that some are not is to use the phrase not all, which is functionally equivalent to some are not. When diagramming statements involving some are not, simply place the word some between the two elements and negate the second element:

Answer 67

Not all T’s are V’s -- same as-- Some T’s are not V’s “Some are not” can be defined as at least one is not, possibly all are not. Thus, if I say, “Some of my friends are not present,” it could be true that none of my friends are present. One of the most popular ways to introduce the idea that some are not is to use the phrase not all, which is functionally equivalent to some are not. When diagramming statements involving some are not, simply place the word some between the two elements and negate the second element:

Answer 68

Not all T’s are V’s -- same as-- Some T’s are not V’s “Some are not” can be defined as at least one is not, possibly all are not. Thus, if I say, “Some of my friends are not present,” it could be true that none of my friends are present. One of the most popular ways to introduce the idea that some are not is to use the phrase not all, which is functionally equivalent to some are not. When diagramming statements involving some are not, simply place the word some between the two elements and negate the second element:

Answer 69

* most * a majority * more than half * almost all * usually * typically

Answer 70

When “most” appears as “most are not,” the interpretation changes due to the not. “Most are not” can be defined as at majority are not, possibly all are not. Thus, if I say, “Most of my friends are not present,” it could be true that none of my friends are present. When diagramming statements involving most are not, simply place the word most between the two elements, place an arrow under the most pointing at the second element, and negate the second element:

Answer 71

When “most” appears as “most are not,” the interpretation changes due to the not. “Most are not” can be defined as at majority are not, possibly all are not. Thus, if I say, “Most of my friends are not present,” it could be true that none of my friends are present. When diagramming statements involving most are not, simply place the word most between the two elements, place an arrow under the most pointing at the second element, and negate the second element: Most W's are not Z's

Answer 72

Most W's are not Z's When “most” appears as “most are not,” the interpretation changes due to the not. “Most are not” can be defined as at majority are not, possibly all are not. Thus, if I say, “Most of my friends are not present,” it could be true that none of my friends are present. When diagramming statements involving most are not, simply place the word most between the two elements, place an arrow under the most pointing at the second element, and negate the second element:

Answer 73

not taxation and not labor -\> in guide not taxation and not labor -\> therefore in guide

Answer 74

From a flaw question All too many weaklings are also cowards, and few cowards fail to be fools. Thus there must be at least oneperson who is both a weakling and a fool. W-some-C C-some-F ------------------ W-some-F

Answer 75

C -some- F could be most but take the weaker of the two interpretations - be mindful though could be either

Answer 76

P ~ → M or M ~ → P --------------------------------------- The formulation "Either A or B" essentially means "If not A, then B" and "If not B, then A" This situation does not prevent both from wining, it just means that at least one must win

Answer 77

either or turns into "If not A, then B" - ~A → B ~ declare all → face penalty ~ face penalty → declare all

Answer 78

~ Suff Exp → ~ Can Enroll Can Enroll → Suff Exp

Answer 79

~ Presumed Innocent → Proven Guilty ~ Proven Guilty → Presumed Innocent

Answer 80

USE IF to diagram If you do not play, you cannot lose ~Play → ~Lose Lose → Play

Answer 81

~ Come to the Party → Mary ~ Mary → Come to the party

Answer 82

~ S → M ~ M → S At least one may drive, unless told otherwise both might be able to. Either or tells us means that one not being present means the other must be

Answer 83

2 Ways More common is classic linking S → M M → P ------------ S → P ------------------------------------------------ Other way is if two all statements share a Sufficient Assumption similar two two mosts - you have to know they exist A → B A → C -------------- B some C

Answer 84

1. The statements are conditional statements, not just a description of a state of affairs and 2. There is at least one term in common between the statements so you might be able to combine them.

Answer 85

( ~ Y → R ) + (R → ~ W) **Transitive** allows for connection ~ Y→ R → ~ W ~ Y → ~ W ------------------------- W → Y

Answer 86

1. Rejecting Alternatives 2. Applyiing a General Principle 3. Appealing to an Authorority 4. Using a Counterexample 5. Making an Analogy 6. Using a Line of Reasoning to draw an Absurd Conclusion **Reductio ad absurdum (not a fallacy - slippery slope is)** 7. Proposing an Alternate Cause for an Observed Effect 8. Underinmining a Premise or Conclusion (generally 2nd perspective) 9. Offering New Evidence / Challenging an Assumption (generally second perspective)

Answer 87

Reductio ad absurdum

Answer 88

Premise Boosters - answers that try to convince us that the premise is true Conclusion Redundancy - answers that simply restate the conclusion Opposites - answers that actually hurt the argument Out of Scope - answers that fall outside the scope of the argument

Answer 89

N → ~ P + ~ S N → ~ P N → ~ S --------------------- P or S (or both) → ~ N

Answer 90

Y → ~ W + ~ X W or X → ~ Y

Answer 91

Answer is B) Showing that Lance's conclusion involves him in a contradiction This method of reasoning is formally known as **Reductio ad absurdum** Often used as a method of reasoning against a first perspective or speaker Using a line of reasoning to draw an absurd conclusion you take a statement which you wish to prove false, and show that if you assume it to be true, then it necessarily leads to a logical contradiction. Or to put it a bit more formally, If statement A is true, then statement B is true, and statement B is false. Therefore, statement A is not true. A ~B ------ A - B B + ~B .: ~A Arguments which use universals such as, “always”, “never”, “everyone”, “nobody”, etc., are prone to being reduced to absurd conclusions. The fallacy is in the argument that could be reduced to absurdity -- so in essence, reductio ad absurdum is a technique to expose the fallacy. Assume P is true. From this assumption, deduce that Q is true. Also deduce that Q is false. Thus, P implies both Q and not Q (a contradiction, which is necessarily false). Therefore, P itself must be false.

Answer 92

Remember on Sufficient Assumption questions, if you have a new term in the conclusion, it must be in the answer choices.

Answer 93

**In _Conditional_ statements, there is no implied temporal relationship:** The sufficient assumption can happen before, at the same time, or after the necessary condition **In _Causal_ statements there is is an implied temporal relationship:** The cause must happen first and the effect must happen at some point in time after the cause ----------------------------------------------------------- In **Causal** statements, the events are **related in a direct way** In **Conditional** statements, the sufficient and necessary conditions are often related directly, _but they do not have to be_ “Before the war can end, I must eat this ice cream cone.” The sufficient condition does not make the necessary condition happen, it just indicates that it must occur --------------------------------------------------- The **the words that introduce** the statements are very different Causal indicators are active, almost powerful words, whereas most conditional indicators do not possess those traits.

Answer 94

Causal statements can be found in the premise or conclusion of an argument. If the causal statement is the conclusion, then the reasoning is flawed. If the causal statement is the premise, then the argument may be flawed, but not because of the causal statement

Answer 95

On the LSAT, when a cause and effect statement appears as the conclusion, the conclusion is **flawed** ex. (of an argument with a causal conclusion) _Premise:_ In North America, people drink a lot of milk. _Premise:_ There is a high frequency of cancer in North America. _Conclusion:_ Therefore, drinking milk causes cancer.

Answer 96

A Post Hoc is a **fallacy** with the following form: A occurs before B. Therefore A is the cause of B. Post hoc ergo propter hoc - "After this, therefore because of this." This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that one event causes another simply because the proposed cause occurred before the proposed effect. More formally, the fallacy involves concluding that A causes or caused B because A occurs before B and there is not sufficient evidence to actually warrant such a claim.

Answer 97

Dont assume one caused the other. While one event could have caused the other, the two events could be the result of a third event, or the two events could simply be correlated but one does not cause the other.

Answer 98

the stated cause is the **only** possible cause of the effect and that consequently the stated cause will **always** produce the effect. This assumption is incredibly extreme and farreaching, and often leads to surprising answer choices that would appear incorrect unless you understand this assumption.

Answer 99

A → B B → A ------------ A ⇔ B Either A and B both join or neither does

Answer 100

A → B B → A ------------ A ⇔ B Either A and B both join or neither does

Answer 101

A ⇔//⇔ B

Answer 102

The stimuli that accompany Method-AP questions tend to be more complex than the average LSAT stimulus. Some problems feature two conclusions (one is the main conclusion, the other is a subsidiary conclusion), and often the stimulus includes two different viewpoints or the use of counterpremises. Thus, the ability to identify argument parts using indicator words is important. If you do see the main conclusion at the end of a Method-AP problem, be prepared to answer a question about a part of the argument other than the conclusion. The test makers do this because they know students are very good at identifying the conclusion when it appears in the last sentence. These questions often feature two conclusions—a main conclusion and subsidiary conclusion—where the main conclusion is typically placed in the first or second sentence, and the last sentence contains the subsidiary conclusion. In addition, the subsidiary conclusion is often preceded by a conclusion indicator such as “thus” or “therefore” while the main conclusion is not prefaced by an indicator. This is an intentional stimulus formation designed to trick many students into erroneously believing that the last sentence contains the main point. Often, the identifiers used before the subsidiary conclusion are dramatic and somewhat misleading, such as “clearly” and “obviously.” In these cases, the conclusion is neither clear nor obvious, and those words are used to lead the reader into thinking that the conclusion should simply be accepted without further analysis.

Answer 103

1. “New” Element Answers 2. Half Right, Half Wrong Answers 3. Exaggerated Answers 4. The Opposite Answer 5. The Reverse Answer

Answer 104

The stimuli that accompany Role questions tend to be more complex than the average LSAT stimulus. Often feature two conclusions—a main conclusion and subsidiary conclusion—where the main conclusion is typically placed in the first or second sentence, and the last sentence contains the subsidiary conclusion. In addition, the subsidiary conclusion is often preceded by a conclusion indicator such as “thus” or “therefore” while the main conclusion is not prefaced by an indicator. One trick used by the test makers in Role questions is to create wrong answers that describe parts of the argument other than the part named in the question stem

Answer 105

Synthesis consists of three different points of view. For a large part of it, the passage may sound like a antithesis - an argument - with 2 conflicting POVs. However, synthesis passages are marked by the emergence of a third party who reconciles or resolves the dispute In synthesis passages, it is very likely the author will advocate the third poinnt of view Synthesis: Present Author (typically aligned with synthesis) * Main idea - Look for answer choices that best capture the author's point * Purpose - Look for answer choices that best describe the author's positition relative to the views presented * Author's Attitude - Look for answer choices that align with the author's opinion on any of the theses * Question anticipation - Be ready for questions about the author's view regarding the theses (viewpoint, agree/disagree) Synthesis: Absent Author (RARE) * Main idea - look for answer choices that best encompass the synthesis * Purpose - Look for an answer choice that best describes the convergence of the thesis and the antithesis in a neutral manner * Author Attitude: Look for a neutral answer (objective, impartial) * Be ready for questions about argument advocacy (viewpoint, disagree/agree)

Answer 106

Present Author (typically aligned with synthesis) * Look for answer choices that best capture the author's point Absent Author (Rare) * Look for answer choices that best capture the synthesis

Answer 107

Present Author (typically aligned with synthesis) * Look for answer choices that best describe the author's position relative to the views preseted Absent Author (Rare) * Look for answer choices that best describe the convergence of the thesis and antithesis in a neutral manner

Answer 108

Examples support a general claim. In this way they are like premises If an example is used extensively: (Extensive) - there will typically be several questions that reference it. Expect a specific reference as well as more general questions referencing the example If it is a localized example, be ready for a specific reference question

Answer 109

D_{B OR}C_B ~D → B ~B → D At least one

Answer 110

_Common Correct Answers_ * Statements that **both speakers** have an opinion about * Disagreement about truth of a premise or conclusion * Disagreement about type of evidence or the importance of evidence used by speaker * Disagreement about causes for an observed effect _Common Incorrect Answers_ * Statements for which one or both speakers do not have an opinion * Statements for which the speakers do or could agree

Answer 111

_Common Correct Answers_ * Statements that **both speakers** must have an opinion about * Agreement about the truth of a premise or conclusion * Agreement that a phenomenon is occuring (even if they disagree about the cause or extent) _Common Incorrect Answers_ * Statements for which one or both speakers do not necessarily have an opinion * Statements for which the speakers do or could agree

Answer 112

* Identify the conclusion and premise(s) of each argument * Do not incorporate any additional knowledge or information * Paraphrase the point(s) of agreement/contention

Answer 113

The main point of a question and answer passage will always be the answer to the question further, the primary structure (thesis, antithesis, synthesis) will be determined by how many answers are posed

Answer 114

The primary structure (thesis, antithesis, synthesis) will be determined by how many answers are posed The main point of a question and answer passage will always be the answer to the question

Answer 115

* **Cause Without Effect** * Show that the claimed cause was not followed by the claimed effect in a similar situation * **Effect Without Cause** * Show that the claimed effect was achieved despite the abscence of the claimed cause in a similar situation * **Alternate Cause**

Answer 116

* **Same Cause and Same Effect** * Show that the claimed cause was followed by the claimed effect in a similar situation * **No Cause No Effect** * ****Show thaat the abscence of the claimed cause was not followed by the claimed effect in a similar situation * **Eliminate Alternate Causes**

Answer 117

A question that asks for information that would be valuable in *_evaluating_* an argument I call them **Evaluation** questions ex. *In evaluating Josh's argument it would be most helpful to know whether* * The correct answer will be a piece of information that will critically affect the validity of the argument * Look for causal relationships - answers will either strengthen or weaken this relationship if it is present * If no causal relationship present, look for an answer whose truth or falsisity will either strengthen the argument - could be the assumption etc

Answer 118

* Locate the conclusion and the premises that support it * Anticipate a logical bridge between the two All sixth graders are insecure. Therefore, Mark must be insecure SA: Mark is in the sixth grade Correct answers to Sufficient Assumption questions are often strong and take the form of conditional assumptions

Answer 119

Correct answers to Sufficient Assumption questions are often strong and take the form of conditional assumptions They must gaurantee the conclusion will be properly inferred

Answer 120

Weak. The correct answer does not guarantee that the argument is valid, but that rather, without it, the argument cant be valid. It is common for necessary assumptions to be weaker than what is required to prove the conclusion

Answer 121

Correct answer choices wll either describe 1. the author's attitutde 2. the structure of the passage If the author is present, look for a description of the passage from the author's point of view. If the author is not present, look for a description of the structure of the passage

Answer 122

Main point ... duh If the author is present, this is their view

Answer 123

(A) fails to utilize the meteorologist's evidence. On Flaw questions, it's really important that the flaw describe a reasoning error committed between the evidence and the conclusion. Nowhere does the author say that the explanation is incomplete. Correct answer: **E) appeals to the authoritiveness of an opinion without evaluating the merit of a putative counterexample** The meteorologist's conclusion is that the sun's luminosity does not essentially control land temperatures on Earth. What does the meteorologist offer in support for this conclusion? Not much! Just that no meteorologist would tell you that this could happen. So the meteorologist is essentially saying that something is true, because many other people would say that it's true - this is an appeal argument. I wouldn't say this is an appeal to an inappropriate authority, since meteorologists are experts in the field of weather patterns - the topic at hand.

Answer 124

**A → ~ B** (Not both) **~ A → B** (At least one) Exactly one outcome

Answer 125

**Q → ~ LA** **~ Q → LA** where (Q=quit) and (LA=Leave of Abscense) **She will either quit or take a leave of absence, exactly one outcome will occur of the two**

Answer 126

**Technocomp will allow Ann to take a leave of absence if it does not find out she has been offered the fellowship, but not otherwise.** **~ FO → ALA** (if doesn't find out, allow leave) **ALA → ~ FO** (Not otherwise - ie. Allowing leave of absence requires them not finding out. Otherwise will not be allowed.)

Answer 127

1. **_Shift in Meaning_** 2. **_Related but Distinct Concepts_** **_Shift in Meaning_** - If the meanings of any key wordshift in meaning during the course of an argument **_Related but Distinct Concepts_** - Treating two unlike concepts as though they are the same

Answer 128

Arguments that invalidly base conclusions on what a person or group of people say or believe ## Footnote **_Innapropriate Authority_** - When an agument relies on an opinion's opinion or testimony, its important to establish that the topic is within that person's area of expertise. Otherwise, the conclusion will not be adequatel supported and the argument is flawed. **_Irrelevant Opinions_** - Arrguments will sometimes rely on the opinions of large groups of people to support conclusions. There are times when this is acceptable. For instance, if a company is running a taste test on consumers. However, if you are attempting to measure the profitability of the same company, the opinions of consumers would be irrelevant. ***It is a fallacy to rely on the opinions of people when their opinions are irrelevant to the truth of the matter at hand***

Answer 129

The word "THUS" is used to begin the final sentence. Language such as "thus/therefore/hence/so" **always indicates a conclusion**, but it _**doesn't necessarily indicate the main conclusion**._ Main Conclusion and Describe the Role questions are notorious for NOT putting the main conclusion as the last sentence and NOT making it obvious by using a term like "thus/therefore/hence/so". (The main task in Main Conclusion and Describe the Role is to find the conclusion, so LSAT needs to make that task trickier than usual) Does the 1st sentence support the 3rd, or does the 3rd sentence support the 1st? We can use the **Therefore Test** to see which ordering makes more sense. You shouldn't express gratitude anonymously. THEREFORE The social function of reinforcing good behavior only works if the benefactor knows the source of gratitude. **or** The social function of reinforcing good behavior only works if the benefactor knows the source of gratitude. THEREFORE You shouldn't express gratitude anonymously. **The second ordering is much more logical. This means that the 3rd sentence is designed to support the 1st sentence.** Our whole argument breaks down like this: MAIN CONC: Obligation to express gratitude can't be satisfied anonymously. (why?) SUBSIDIARY/INTERMEDIATE CONC: [because] The social function of reinforcing good behavior only works if the benefactor knows the source of gratitude. (why?) PREMISE: [because] Human psych is still driven mainly by personal interaction. Now that we've deconstructed the argument, we know the claim the question asks about (the 1st sentence) is our Main Conclusion. So we can scan the answers looking for applicable wording.

Answer 130

The LSAT uses “directly proportional” in wrong answers fairly frequently. Directly proportional means: if one thing goes up 10%, then another thing also goes up by exactly 10%. Direct proportionality is almost never relevant in an argument **example:** In successful plays, audiences must care what happens to at least some characters. But in Brecht’s plays, it’s hard to discern any (any=all) of the characters' personalities. **Correct Answer:** An audience that cannot readily discern a character's personality will not take any interest in that character **Trick Answer:** The extent to which a play succeeds is directly proportional to the extent which the play's audiences care about its character

Answer 131

**Inadaquete... bad** ## Footnote **Suppose I make the following argument: *“The moon is made of green cheese, therefore it’s interesting.”*** **That’s a *_stupid_* argument. My evidence is _wrong_: the moon is not made of green cheese. _But does that mean the moon is boring?_** **Of course not.** **_A conclusion isn’t false just because someone makes a bad argument._** Example: Critic: An art historian says 15th Century painters were better because they were more planimateric than were 16th Century Painters. But this is wrong. 15th century painters were not more masterful, for being better at planemateric is irrelevant to mastery. **The author showed the planimetric argument is not convincing. So the argument for the conclusion is wrong. But that doesn’t mean the conclusion (15th century painters are better) is wrong.** ***_Rejecting a position on the grounds that an inadequate argument has been made for it IS A FLAW_***

Answer 132

**IS A FLAW** ## Footnote **Suppose I make the following argument: *“The moon is made of green cheese, therefore it’s interesting.”*** **That’s a stupid argument. My evidence is wrong: the moon is not made of green cheese. But does that mean the moon is boring?** **Of course not. A conclusion isn’t false just because someone makes a bad argument.** **Example:** *Critic: An art historian says 15th Century painters were better because they were more planimateric than were 16th Century Painters. But this is wrong. 15th century painters were not more masterful, for being better at planemateric is irrelevant to mastery.* **The author showed the planimetric argument is not convincing. So the argument for the conclusion is wrong. But that doesn’t mean the conclusion (15th century painters are better) is wrong.** **_Rejecting a position on the grounds that an inadequate argument has been made for it IS A FLAW_**

Answer 133

7-3 6-4 5-5

Answer 134

**G - M - T** 3 - 2 - 1 1 - 3 - 2

Answer 135

5-4-1-1 5-3-2-1 5-2-2-2 4-4-2-1 4-3-3-1 4-3-2-2 3-3-3-2

Answer 136

A - B - C - D 4 - 2 - 1 - 1 2 - 1 - 4 - 1 2 - 1 - 1 - 4 2 - 1 - 3 - 2 2 - 1 - 2 - 3

Answer 137

4 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 3 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 2

Answer 138

5 - 2- 0 5 - 1 - 1 4 - 3 - 0 3 - 3 - 1 3 - 2 - 2

Answer 139

W X Y Z 2 3 6 2 3 2 6 3

Answer 140

6 3 3 3 3 3 5 4 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3

Answer 141

M-T-W-Th 1 - 1 - 3 - 2 3 - 1 - 2 - 1 2 - 2 - 2 - 1 1 - 3 - 2 - 1

Answer 142

3 2 1 1 2 2 2 1

Answer 143

Four horses distributed three vets 3 1 0 2 2 0 2 1 1

Answer 144

Seven computer terminals distributed to two positions (on/off) On - Off 2 - 5 3 - 4 4 -

Answer 145

turns into If Smith gets elected, he **might not** serve only one term as mayor You can negate the necessary condition using wont necessarily or might not

Answer 146

You can enter even if you do not pay admission

Answer 147

Early to bed and early to rise **does not necessaril**y makes a person healthy, wealthy and wise

Answer 148

No recording that is not played on the radio is one that record companies believe would be profitable if transferred to CD. V All recordings that are not played on the radio, are those the record companies believe will Not be profitable if transferred to CD V (contrapositive) V To be considered profitable to transfer to CD, a recording must be played on the radio

Answer 149

Becoming aware of individuals who have won a major jackpot leads at least some people to incorrectly estimate their chances for winning. VV Becoming aware of individuals who have won a major jackpot leads at least **No One** to incorrectly estimate their chances for winning.

Answer 150

Just that the Sufficient of the All appears in the Some REMEMBER - what position in the some does not matter A -some- B is the exact same thing as B -some- A

Answer 151

**H+I \> G ⇔ J \> H+I** **Contrapositive** **H or I \> J ⇔ G \> H or I**

Answer 152

**V \> S ⇒ V \> W + T (and S)** **W or T \> V ⇒ S \> V**

Answer 153

**L - N+M ⇒ G+J - L - N+M** **L - G or J (L before G or J) ⇒ N or M - L (No or M before L)**

Answer 154

**~ (K - M) → (M - L)** **(K - M) → ~ (M - L)** K-M or M-L (Not Both)

Answer 155

**~ (M - L+P) ⇒ (L+P - M)**

Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Diagram Flashcards

Brainscape's Knowledge Genome^TM