to the top

#19 - None of the students taking literature are taking

srcline@noctrl.edu
LSAT Master
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:50 pm
Points: 74

Hello,

So I read over Rachel and Luca's post and they helped clear up the first two rules, but I'm still a bit confused on the third part of the stimulus.

So "none of the students taking rhetoric are taking physics" so doesn't this mean that those students that are taking rhetoric are NOT taking physics? I'm still confused on how to combine these.

Thankyou
Sarah
Jonathan Evans
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 2:12 pm
Points: 570
Location: DFW, Texas

Sarah,

Yes, you're right. If you're taking rhetoric, you're not taking physics. These kinds of conditionals sometimes invite students to miss the forest for the trees. You get so caught up symbolizing stuff that you forget to notice what actually is going on.

Let's break it down.

The lit students don't take physics.

The rhet students don't take physics.

Some physics students take art.

Okay. What connections can we make. The only common variable is physics. What does physics connect? Physics is the link here.

We know literature and rhetoric students don't take physics. Great. Do we know anything about them with respect to each other? No.

However, we know there are physics students who take art. So what? So these physics students who take art are neither literature students nor rhetoric students. Bingo. That's your connection.

Answer choice (A) gives it to you on a silver platter. The rest of the answers just shift the pieces around in a bunch of garbage.

The key is prephrasing. Recognize the essential connections. Try to anticipate where the author is going with his statements.
Nikki Siclunov
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 1383
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:31 am
Points: 1,208

Hi Sarah,

To add to Jonathan's excellent response above, this question uses Formal Logic, which is outlined in the Logical Reasoning Bible (under the chapter titled Formal Logic), and also in the Virtual Module under Lesson 8 of our Full-Length LSAT course.

Here's the Formal Logic diagram for the relationships in this stimulus:

    1. LIT :dblline: PHY :some: ART

    Therefore, ART :some: LIT

Since a "some" statement can be read backwards, we know that some Art students take Physics. However, no Physics students take Literature. Therefore, some Art students don't take Literature (answer choice A).

    2. RHET :dblline: PHY :some: ART

    Therefore, ART :some: NO RHET

By the same line of reasoning, we can also conclude that some Art students don't take Rhetoric.

Note: Just because there are students taking art but not literature does not mean that there are students taking both art and literature. The inference of the type "ART :some: LIT" is not available to us given the information provided.

Hope this helps!
Nikki Siclunov
PowerScore Test Preparation
srcline@noctrl.edu
LSAT Master
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:50 pm
Points: 74

Hello, Jonathan and Nikki

Yes this makes sense, While I was reading Jonathan's response I was thinking that this sounds like an inference that those physics students who are taking art, means that these students dont take lit or rhetoric. I think the formal logic part was throwing me off b/c I was getting caught up with the sufficient and necessary conditions.

Thankyou
Sarah