to the top

"Even if" dilemma regarding 5-29 Q4, and 12-31 Q 8 and 9

lathlee
LSAT Destroyer
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 1:53 pm
Points: 583

Hi. the Qs and answers (in the back) are following:

opposition construct drill:


5-29. Q 4: Happiness is impossible unless we profess a commitment to freedom.

a: Even if we do not profess a commitment to freedom, happiness may still be possible.

12-31 Q 8 and Q 9 and answers:

8.

Q: I might go to the party with you, but unless Sarah goes, i won't.

a: i might go to the party with you even if sarah doesn't go.

9.

q. we can escape only if neither of us is recognized.

a: even if one of us is recognized, we might be able to escape.

6-30. 8. Unless we protect our rights, we will lose them

a: even if we protect our rights, we will lose them.

this is Powerscore's official guide what to do when you see even if:

https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/how-to ... snt-matter

according to this blog post: the lesson I got out from: Even if is pretty much necessary conditioner modifier but it's unique function allows conditional reasoning to occur EVEN in ABSENCE of NECESSARY condition occurring or not, sufficient condition can STILL occur regardless of NECESSARY condition exist or not.

Now these are my issuess with these my question.

For these drills:

For 5 - 29 Q 4,

5-29. Q 4: Happiness is impossible unless we profess a commitment to freedom.

according to the Powerscore's philosophy"s , the ONE Correct answer should be

"happiness is possible then we do not profess a commitment to freedom"

But use of even if, which the answer says, makes this statement in this following TWO interpretations in this scenario:

Happiness possible then we profess a comment to freedom

or

Happiness possible then we do not profess a commitment to freedom


For 12-31 Q 8 : I might go to the party with you, but unless Sarah goes, i won't.

a: i might go to the party with you even if sarah doesn't go.

I get it this case even if is used cuz question stem, "I" might go or will go two scenarios are stated.

For the 12-31 Q 9:

q. we can escape only if neither of us is recognized.

according to Powerscore philosophy: the answer should be: if we can escape then one of us is recognized.

but two interpretations are technically possible by the function of even if :

Escape :arrow: one of us recognized

escape :arrow: neither of us is recognized.

6-30. 8. Unless we protect our rights, we will lose them
"We would not lose them then we didn't protect our rights"
(this one I simply flat out just don't get the powerscore's answer: a: even if we protect our rights, we will lose them. )

for all three Q's answers exception of 6-30 Q8, , I think what you guys try to teach us is that sufficient condition in these occasions can occur regardless of the necessary condition is occurring or not. my real issue is 5-29 Q 4 and 12-31 Q 9 , why of all other Qs that renders us to think sufficient condition can still occur regardless of necessary condition occurs or not, why did you guys use only 5-29 Q4 and 12-31 Q9 only. and two, why don't you guys emphasize the use of even if technically allows two interpretations to occur as in

sufficient occurs ---> necessary condition

sufficient occurs ----> - Necessary condition


BTW, I know i am thinking too much :-D Ha.Ha.Ha. sorry if my too much thinking causing any troubles
Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 2305
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:01 pm
Points: 2,119

The short answer here, lathlee, is that you are treating the opposite of these claims as if that means the necessary condition cannot occur, which is the polar opposite. The logical opposite is just that the necessary condition is no longer necessary. Not that it can't happen, but that it doesn't need to.

Think of it this way: the logical opposite of "this is necessary" is "this is not necessary". You're going too far and making it "this is not allowed".
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam