LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

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

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 8223
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#59070
Please post your questions below!
 AWash180
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: Oct 03, 2018
|
#59129
Hello!

I originally picked B for this question because if R is 1st then it is true that T must be 7th since there are only two places for T to go according to the 3rd rule.

Is E the correct answer because T must be the sufficient condition and R must be the necessary condition in order to replicate all of the impacts of the 4th rule?

Thanks!
 Rachael Wilkenfeld
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 571
  • Joined: Dec 15, 2011
|
#59456
Hi Awash,

For this one, we want something that forces R to be in 1 whenever T is not in 1. When is T not in 1? When T is in 7. We could rewrite the rule to say when T is in 7, R is in 1. As I read the question, that would be my strong prephrase.

Answer choice (B) is the mistaken reversal of the rule we want. It says if R is in 1, T is in 7. That's true if anyone is in 1, since T has to be in either 1 or 7. We need something that tells us when T is in 7, R must be in 1. That's what answer choice (E) does.

Hope that helps!
Rachael
User avatar
 apurva_98
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: Jun 05, 2021
|
#87863
Hi!

When doing this question originally, I realized that the new rule would need to force R into 1 when T is not there so I eliminated everything but A and E. I ended up picking E because it was a conditional and closest to the original rule. Can someone explain why A is incorrect?

Thanks!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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