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: 7867
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#71236
Please post your questions below! Thank you!
 Mollythecatttt
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: Oct 21, 2019
|
#71397
Hi - I have some difficulties with this question. The stimulus mentioned "few" for several times, and I take it as "some" in my "lawgic chain." Is that wrong?

Here is what I draw:
("--s-->" means "some")

Highly Original --s--> Abstract
Oil Painting ----> Highly Original ------> produced later in his career
Oil Painting--s--> Critically acclaimed OR popular with collectors

Thanks!
User avatar
 KelseyWoods
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 981
  • Joined: Jun 26, 2013
|
#71412
Hi Molly!

In this case, phrases like "few of her abstract works demonstrate much originality" can better be understood as "Most of her abstract works are NOT original. So instead of using "some" in your diagramming, use "most."

The statements can be diagrammed as follows:

Oil paintings :arrow: Highly original
Oil paintings :most: Critically acclaimed
Oil paintings :most: Popular with collectors
Highly original :arrow: Later in career
Abstract works :most: Highly original

If we take the contrapositive of the first statement (Highly original :arrow: Oil paintings), we can combine it with the last statement to get:

Abstract works :most: Highly original :arrow: Oil paintings

Take out the middleman and it becomes:
Abstract works :most: Oil paintings

That leads us to answer choice (D).

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey
 jel2184
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2019
|
#71426
Hi Kelsey,

This is the few parts of the logic conditioning that screws me up. So if they say "Few of her abstract works...much originality" I took that to be "Abstract :some: original" But you have said "Abstract :most: not original" I did not know that we can make this assumption. Can you confirm?

So If it says few A's are B's, we can make the inference that Most A's are not B's?

example:
"A :most: not B

Thanks,
Jordan
 Mollythecatttt
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: Oct 21, 2019
|
#71434
Hi Kelsey -

Thanks! Now it's crystal clear for me. I happened to run into a similar question, which also focuses on the interpretation of "few" - PT45.4.22 (but it is a sufficient assumption question.)

I usually will just interpret "few" as "some," but from these two questions, I realize it's far from enough. "Few [x] are [y]" should be translated in two ways: 1. some [x] are [y]; 2. most [x] are [/y]. LSAT writers may pick any of them to push out further inferences ... bad bad boy.

KelseyWoods wrote:Hi Molly!

In this case, phrases like "few of her abstract works demonstrate much originality" can better be understood as "Most of her abstract works are NOT original. So instead of using "some" in your diagramming, use "most."

The statements can be diagrammed as follows:

Oil paintings :arrow: Highly original
Oil paintings :most: Critically acclaimed
Oil paintings :most: Popular with collectors
Highly original :arrow: Later in career
Abstract works :most: Highly original

If we take the contrapositive of the first statement (Highly original :arrow: Oil paintings), we can combine it with the last statement to get:

Abstract works :most: Highly original :arrow: Oil paintings

Take out the middleman and it becomes:
Abstract works :most: Oil paintings

That leads us to answer choice (D).

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey
 Rachael Wilkenfeld
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 478
  • Joined: Dec 15, 2011
|
#71440
Hi Jel,

We can read "few" as less than half here. Few can be a bit hard to define, but we have some more thoughts on imprecise quantity terms here. Few is a term that is by it's nature imprecise. If I say that you can have a few dollars, I almost certainly mean some number less than 10. If I say a few people in New York have been sickened in a outbreak of a disease, I probably mean some number well over 10---otherwise, we'd be using a term to indicate higher rarity.

In any case, in this situation, if few show much originality, we can say that most are not original. Otherwise, if most ARE original, then we are saying more than half are original. Few would be inconsistent with more than half.

Hope that helps
Rachael
jel2184 wrote:Hi Kelsey,

This is the few parts of the logic conditioning that screws me up. So if they say "Few of her abstract works...much originality" I took that to be "Abstract :some: original" But you have said "Abstract :most: not original" I did not know that we can make this assumption. Can you confirm?

So If it says few A's are B's, we can make the inference that Most A's are not B's?

example:
"A :most: not B

Thanks,
Jordan
 jm123
  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: May 21, 2020
|
#76053
I read the explanation and understand why D is correct. I diagrammed the stimulus as some, as opposed to most, are not. Just so I know going forward, if a must be true stimulus mentions few are, we diagram it as if most are not?

For example,

Few fruits are apples would be most fruits are not apples?
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 3694
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#76481
I would diagram "few are" as just that, jm123, and would negate that with few. Don't create an absolute rule for yourself about how to handle that every time, but be flexible in your approach. But yes, it is reasonable to translate the concept of "few are X" to the concept of "most are not X", because while the idea of "few" is subjective, it does mean a relatively small amount, and it is reasonable to interpret that as less than half.

Like you, I prephrased "at least some of her abstract works were not oil paintings." I was hesitant about the "most" in answer D, but it was clearly the best answer and the only one even close to that prephrase. Don't box yourself in with strict rules of construction, but focus on the broader meanings and be flexible enough to accept different words and phrases that can mean the same thing as what you are looking for.
User avatar
 giulicard
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: Jan 12, 2021
|
#83232
I have redone the question a few times and was able to diagram as you did above, however, I don't understand why answer choice C is incorrect. Is it because it is a MBT instead of a CBT?
 Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 722
  • Joined: Dec 06, 2013
|
#83267
giulicard,

Answer choice (C) would be better if it were reversed - because she didn't produce highly original paintings until late, but all her oil paintings were highly original, she must have produced all her oils late.

Imagine she produced 100 total paintings late in her career, 20 of them oil, 80 watercolor. According to the first conditional relationship, all 20 of those oil paintings must be highly original. But only 20% of her late works are oil paintings. There's no reason that situation can't happen - the stimulus allows the situation I created, but it's a situation where answer choice (C) is false. So it could be false, and thus doesn't have to be true.

Robert Carroll

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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