LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

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

 Oneshot06
  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: Feb 07, 2018
|
#45854
Hi,

I reasoned with the above explanation by creating a venn diagram. One circle was Banjo the other Guitar. The overlapping bit was b+g. So if I had 100 = B, at least 51 is b+g. To make conclusion valid of most g not skilled in b, I need at least 52 of g only + 51 (b+g) to have 103 g. I can visually see the whole structure of the argument now. Do you think this method would work for future q's that are conditional in nature and deal with quantities?
 Daniel Stern
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: Feb 07, 2018
|
#46214
Yes, OneShot, I think you are on track with a technique that you can use in exactly the same way on other questions where there are comparisons of quantities.

Nice work!
Dan
 lanereuden
  • Posts: 147
  • Joined: May 30, 2019
|
#67567
Why did everyone over complicate this??!

Let’s use easy example:
The first fact is Most banjo players are guitarists. For instance: 6/10 banjo are also guitar
Then we also know, Most people who play guitar are not skilled banjoists

That means, there must be more guitarists than banjoists:

continuing with above example below:

From the second fact, Let’s say we have (or at least in theory) 10 guitarists as well, then we have
6/10 guitarists do not play banjo , which leaves 4 guitarists who ALSO DO banjo
This makes no sense because it is not possible: 4 is less than the 6 people who do both Banjo and guitar (again, as seen by the fact there’s 6/10 banjo are also guitar)

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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