E is seen exactly three patients after C (Page 97, 2020 Ed)

[med2law]

What am I missing here (page 97, "Consider one more example:"

Rule 1: E is seen exactly three patients after C.

I set up the rule as C _ _ _ E, but the book sets it up as C _ _ E.

Why do we include patient C as a patient seen after C? Patient C is not seen after patient C. That sounds contradictory.

If there are 3 patients after C, as the rule states, then how come the diagram/setup is C _ _ E? That is technically 2 patients after C, is it not? Three patients after C would, in my mind, be C _ _ _ E.

Two questions:
1. Is this an actual LSAT question?
2. If so, am I supposed to assume this language going forward on my tests? That 3 patients after C includes patient C as being a patient after itself?

Hope the question makes sense. Because I am confused!

Regards.

[med2law]

Ok, may have answered my own question here. Since E is exactly 3 patients after C, I should read it as E is exactly the third patient after C. Is that correct?

Gosh these test makers ARE tricky!

[med2law]

Follow up:

I would like to know if this was an actual LSAT question so I know what to expect. I presume it is. The horror!

The only saving grace for this tricky split-block is that it says "exactly." I'm still very wary of this language. Hence the post.

It hurts my brain, so I have a question:

Should I assume that exactly 3 patients after C (E) is "C" inclusive, or "E" inclusive - or does it not matter?

My head hurts!

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Med,

Yes, you worked this one out, and yes, it is based on real LSAT language Which is great since you just learned a key lesson about the test : you have to read everything very closely!

If it helps, there are tow other threads on this same question you might find useful:

• https://forum.powerscore.com/lsat/viewtopic.php?t=3616
  
  https://forum.powerscore.com/lsat/viewtopic.php?t=14391

Ignore the page numbers in those, but since this is so tricky, it's been asked about before and both those give more details (I'm sure there are more threads on it too but just did a quick search).

I hope that helps. Thanks!