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: 7833
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#71251
Please post your questions below! Thank you!
 eg_m
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2019
|
#71429
Can someone diagram the conditional logic for the 2nd sentence?

LA or SLH
      and       :arrow:     Cow3y
removed
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 4887
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#71456
I like your diagram, eg_m! You've got everything covered there, and it should work well. The contrapositive would read something like "if a book has been checked out within the past 3 years, then it either cannot be removed from circulation or else it is not written by a local author and is not significant to local history."

Another option here is to do a nested conditional, which means a conditional statement is placed within a larger conditional statement. That could go like this:

LA

or :arrow: (Cow3y :arrow: removed)

SLH

There's other ways to do it, too, with variations on the contrapositives. For example, in the parentheses in my necessary condition I could have instead written (removed :arrow: Cow3y).

Work within the confines of what the language logically requires, keeping your sufficient and necessary conditions straight, but within that framework there can be some flexibility. You did it right!
 medialaw111516
  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: Dec 11, 2018
|
#72152
I diagrammed mine that way and got it right, but am slightly worried whether or not I'm looking at this correctly.

After reading the premise, I noticed that both conditions had the element of time. So, my prephrase was that the only reasons paper flowers would not be removed in the first case are
1. If it was not badly damaged
or 2. if it was checked out more 2 years ago or more recently

In the second case, it would only not be removed if it was checked out 3 years ago or more recently.

B fell into both of those time categories so I picked it, but is time the crucial element here like I prephrased?
 Claire Horan
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 408
  • Joined: Apr 18, 2016
|
#72387
Hi MediaLaw,

You are right that time is a key element because, if you don't know how long it has been since the book was checked out, you cannot say definitively that it should not be removed from circulation.

Your prephrase is incorrect because the conditions do not require a book to be removed from circulation. They specify when a book CAN be removed from circulation.

I think the reason for your mistake is that you made it overly complicated, and I think you can approach the question in a more straightforward way. The application of the rules leads to the conclusion that Paper Flowers should not be removed, so we are looking for the answer choice that, by itself, leads to that conclusion. A book is not removable if it is not badly damaged or if it has been checked out within two years. We can ignore the other conditional for a moment because, if either of these are present in the answer choices, we are done. B says the book has been checked out in the last year, and that's sufficient to know that it's not removable. The diagramming is interesting on this one, but having to navigate two conditionals may have confused you.

Good luck with your studying!
 theamazingrace
  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: Oct 17, 2020
|
#81012
I spent a lot of time on this question trying to decide between B and C. Since the application does not specify what type of book it is C is wrong because 2.5 years only applies to the books that were either written to local authors or were considered to be of significance to local history and not to regular books? Is my thinking correct?

Thanks!
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 4887
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#81221
Correct, theamazingrace. In order to prove that the book should not be removed from circulation we would need to know more about it. All we know from answer C is that it was checked out between two and three years ago, but we would need to also know that it is not badly damaged, or that it was written by a local author, or that it is of significance to local history. Since we have none of that information, we cannot conclude that it should not be removed.
User avatar
 gabyd33
  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: Jan 15, 2022
|
#97568
What question type is this? I am struggling to categorize it.
User avatar
 atierney
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 215
  • Joined: Jul 06, 2021
|
#97629
Yes, this is a Justify the Conclusion question, where we are looking for an answer that is "sufficient" to prove the conclusion correct. A good way to identify these is look for the word "justify" in the question stem, and here it is accompanied by the word "fully," thereby indicating a sufficiency requirement.

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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