Answer D is indeed a Could Be True but not a Must Be True answer, GGIBA003@FIU.EDU
, because Z could be 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th in this local scenario. M actually COULD be 3rd, since the necessary condition for M going 3rd (L is last) has been satisfied. For example, this solution would work:
But so could this one:
Conditional rules can and often do lead to inferences. For example, imagine that this game also had this rule:
"If K is before M, Z is first."
From this rule we could infer that K will never be first. If it was first, it would be before M, but that would require Z to be first, setting up an impossible conflict. It doesn't matter that the rule is conditional; that inference is an absolute requirement whether the rule is triggered (the sufficient condition happens) or not! Start looking for implications like that from conditional rules and you'll find that they can be much more "active" than they may at first appear.
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam