LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 josuecarolina
  • Posts: 24
  • Joined: Jul 20, 2012
|
#4611
Mods, it would be good if you could address p.2-39 in the homework book, problem 1. "People with serious financial problems". Actually, I got all the drills in this section wrong, except for problem 3...and I didn't chart it right :/
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5153
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#4617
This one can be approached somewhat mechanically, unlike our more challenging examples on this thread. "People with" is similar enough to our common indicator phrase "People who", which introduces a sufficient condition. So, that first premise becomes Serious Financial Problems -> Happy.

The argument later gives us something that looks almost like the contrapositive statement. That last sentence diagrams out as Can Be Happy -> Financial Problems Solved. Not that it's not exactly the contrapositive - this one doesn't say Serious Financial Problems, but rather Financial Problems.

The answer we're looking for IS the contrapositive, and that's answer E, as explained on the next two pages in the book.

What tripped you up on this one? Was it "people with" not being an exact match for "people who"?

Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT Instructor
 josuecarolina
  • Posts: 24
  • Joined: Jul 20, 2012
|
#4620
Well, I diagrammed it:

Happy :arrow: financial problems solved (FPS)
and I diagrammed the contrapositivie
NO FPS :arrow:NO Happy

so Tyson, looking at what you wrote "People who" introduces the sufficient condition...serious financial problems. so the necessary is "cannot be happy"?

But it looks like you charted it

SFP :arrow: Happy...doesn't this say "If you have SFP, then you are happy?" wouldn't it be SFP :arrow: NO Happy?

Anyway, I see my diagram being wrong now, but I am still confused about yours. thanks!
 Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1153
  • Joined: Apr 11, 2011
|
#4622
Hey Josue,

Thanks for your message--you're right about that first premise (it can be very easy to leave out a "not" now and again).

The first sentence tells us that people with big financial problems cannot be happy--for clarity I'll call these problems FP:

FP --> NOT happy

...and the last sentence says people can be happy only if their financial problems are solved:

Happy --> NO FP (no financial problems because they've been solved).

...and it's the diagram that leads us to correct answer choice E.

I hope that's helpful--let me know if everything is clear--thanks!

~Steve

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.