## #11 - Global, Cannot Be True

PowerScore Staff

Posts: 6579
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:19 pm
Points: 3,253

Complete Question Explanation
(The complete setup for this game can be found here: viewtopic.php?t=4898)

The correct answer choice is (C)

As noted during the setup discussion (viewtopic.php?f=120&t=4898) of the inference resulting from the combination of the first and fourth rules, N cannot be assigned to the Zambia ambassadorship, and hence answer choice (C) is correct.
meercat44
LSAT Apprentice

Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:34 pm
Points: 12

Is there another way to arrive at this answer? It seemed extremely time consuming to go through the "what if Zambia" scenario for every candidate so I did not do that.
PowerScore Staff

Posts: 2443
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:01 pm
Points: 2,258

That's not how we got this inference, meercat. Rather, we found it as part of our original setup by noticing that N was in conflict with both K and, by extension, J, such that when N is selected, neither K nor J can be. That meant the other two ambassadors with N can only be O and L, and L can only go to Zambia, so N cannot. Once we have that inference, we can add it to our global diagram as a not-law for N under group Z, and that inference is exactly the sort of thing we would anticipate the authors asking us about.

My approach to this question, since it is a global question, is to start by looking at the inferences in my main diagram and see if any of them is an answer choice. Testing each answer is slow and painful, but if I can quickly see a few things that cannot be true (L cannot go to V or Y, N cannot go to Z, J and N cannot both be assigned) then I move to scanning the answer choices to see if one of them rewards me for having already done that work. Boom, there it is - a gift! No testing involved.

If I hadn't started with a look over the main diagram, I would instead have looked at each answer to see if I have a problem with it. Not testing, but perhaps comparing to solutions I had already worked out, prior questions, etc. I haven't seen the results in answers A and B yet (unless they were part of hypotheticals in my setup, but let's say they were not), so I just call them contenders and move along. I see answer C, I compare it to my diagram, and I have a winner! If I was feeling cautious I might glance at the remaining answers. In my approach to question 10 I saw that L didn't have to be assigned, so D is out, and O also didn't have to be, so E is out. As far as I am concerned, that's good enough! I pick C and move along, again without testing a thing.

Use your initial setup and inferences, use prior work, and be sure to sort the answers into losers and contenders before you start doing any unnecessary diagramming. Sometimes the right answer is so clear and obvious that you can just select it and go!