to the top

#25- Any popular television series that is groundbreaking is

PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
Posts: 6670
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:19 pm
Points: 3,343

Please post your questions below! Thank you!
LSAT Apprentice
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2019 4:09 pm
Points: 17

How would we diagram this question and answer choice C? My diagrams (below) did not match:

PT --> GB --> CA
PT--Some--> not CA ---> not GB

(C) UB --> EF
notEF --> not UB

Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
Posts: 500
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 7:18 am
Points: 436


For the stimulus:

PTS + GB :arrow: CA

PTS :some: CA

PTS :some: GB

The first premise is a single conditional. It claims that if two sufficient conditions are both met (a thing is a popular television series, and the thing is groundbreaking), then the necessary condition is met (the thing is critically acclaimed).

The second premise should be distinguished on its own, as should the conclusion. The second premise is a statement claiming that not all things that are popular television series are critically acclaimed. Any "not all this are that" statement is a "some" statement. If "not all this are that," then "some this are not that." So, "some popular television series are not critically acclaimed," as diagrammed above.

The conclusion has the same form, so I think that should make sense after the previous paragraph's discussion of the "not all" language.

Answer choice (C):

BIOG + BIASED :arrow: EF

BIOG :some: EF


It's really important in answer choice (C) and in the stimulus to treat the two sufficient conditions of the first premise in each separately. Because the second premise deals with only one of those conditions, and the conclusion relates those two conditions to each other, if you combine them into a single condition, you can't really diagram the rest of the argument.

Robert Carroll