LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

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

 FrannieVargas
  • Posts: 13
  • Joined: Jan 07, 2012
|
#3462
I'm currently working through chapter 5 HW and came across the Statement Negation Drill (pg 5-14) While I am doing well on this exercise and am best friends with the Opposition Construct, I'm having a difficult time understanding how to negate conditional statements. Helps please.

Loyally,
Frannie Vargas '12
User avatar
 Dave Killoran
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 4701
  • Joined: Mar 25, 2011
|
#3472
Hi Frannie,

Thanks for the message. A conditional statement is negated by stating that the necessary condition is not necessary. Let's look at an example to see how it works.

Consider the following statement:

To get to the top of the building, you must take the stairs.

In this sentence, the author is claiming that for someone to get to the top of the building, it is necessary that they take the stairs. The diagram would be:

Top of the building --> stairs

To negate this statement, we would need to show that that the necessary condition (take the stairs) doesn't have to happen. That negation would appear as follows:

To get to the top of the building, you do not necessarily have to take the stairs.

Using your friend the Opposition Construct, you can see that the "must" in the first sentence turned into "not necessarily" when the statement was negated.

Here's another example:

Terence won't go skiing unless Mia goes skiing.

Diagram: Terence skiing --> Mia skiing

Negation: Terence can go skiing even if Mia does not go skiing.

Note that there are numerous ways to word that negation, so that example is just one phrasing. But, the key is to show that Terence can go without Mia having to go.

Please let me know if that helps. Thanks!
User avatar
 AspenHerman
  • Posts: 61
  • Joined: Apr 03, 2021
|
#87644
Hi! I'm going to ressurct this question.

This one specifically revolves around number 4 (page 5-14)
Happiness is impossible unless we profess a commitment to freedom.
Using the unless equation...
Happiness :arrow: commitment to freedom
Translated to plain english: If happiness is possible, then we profess a commitment to freedom.

I would expect the answer to be: If happiness is possible, then we do not necessarily profess a commitment to freedom.

However, the key says:
Even if we do not profess a commitment to freedom, happiness may still be possible.
(slash) commitment to freedom :arrow: happiness may be possible

Is this another way to do it? Mistaken reversal, with an opposite (now) sufficient condition? Did I read/interpet something wrong?

Curious minds are wondering...

Aspen :-?
 Rachael Wilkenfeld
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 669
  • Joined: Dec 15, 2011
|
#87794
Hi Aspen,

I think you diagrammed the answer choice given incorrectly. Remember that the necessary condition can appear before the sufficient in a statement. Even if we do not express a commitment to freedom, happiness is possible would be

Happiness possible :arrow: not nec. commitment to freedom

Hope that helps!
User avatar
 AspenHerman
  • Posts: 61
  • Joined: Apr 03, 2021
|
#87878
Rachael Wilkenfeld wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 5:12 pm Hi Aspen,

I think you diagrammed the answer choice given incorrectly. Remember that the necessary condition can appear before the sufficient in a statement. Even if we do not express a commitment to freedom, happiness is possible would be

Happiness possible :arrow: not nec. commitment to freedom

Hope that helps!
Thank you for answering~

I was going off the "if". Now, I understand that "if" doesn't necessarily always have to signify a sufficient statement... so I guess that's where I went wrong, by trying to translate the answer from the key.
I guess I still have the concept down, and it's just differently stated in the key?
User avatar
 Ryan Twomey
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 141
  • Joined: Mar 04, 2021
|
#88012
Hey Aspen,

Yes. So the only way to negate a conditional statement in an assumption question answer choice is to say that the necessary condition isn't actually necessary.

Dave's two examples above provide a brilliant and simple description for how to negate conditional statements in assumption questions.

But first, I would recommend making sure you are perfect at mapping out conditional statements before worrying about how to negate them. Mapping out conditional statements should be memorized like the back of your hand. Then when you negate them you just say that the necessary condition could happen or could not happen even with the sufficient condition present.

I'll provide one example to add to Dave's. If my answer choice says:

Clouds------>Rain

Negating that answer choice would mean: it could be cloudy and then we have no idea if it rains or not.

I hope this makes sense, and I wish you all of the luck in your studies.

Best,
Ryan
User avatar
 AspenHerman
  • Posts: 61
  • Joined: Apr 03, 2021
|
#88110
Ryan Twomey wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 5:00 pm Hey Aspen,

Yes. So the only way to negate a conditional statement in an assumption question answer choice is to say that the necessary condition isn't actually necessary.

Dave's two examples above provide a brilliant and simple description for how to negate conditional statements in assumption questions.

But first, I would recommend making sure you are perfect at mapping out conditional statements before worrying about how to negate them. Mapping out conditional statements should be memorized like the back of your hand. Then when you negate them you just say that the necessary condition could happen or could not happen even with the sufficient condition present.

I'll provide one example to add to Dave's. If my answer choice says:

Clouds------>Rain

Negating that answer choice would mean: it could be cloudy and then we have no idea if it rains or not.

I hope this makes sense, and I wish you all of the luck in your studies.

Best,
Ryan
Thanks for responding. So, your response got me thinking... would "even if" be an indicator for the necessary condition? I'm noticing, amongst several examples, that an unless statement is negated to an "even if" statement.

Thanks!
Aspen
 Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1008
  • Joined: Dec 06, 2013
|
#88309
Aspen,

"Even if" is not a conditional indicator. In fact, it's the opposite - "even if" indicates there is no conditional relationship between two things. That's why every negation of an "unless" statement involved "even if" in your experience. Remember, as the Unless Equation teaches us, that "unless" indicates a conditional. If I say "I won't go to Scrooge's funeral unless lunch is provided", we diagram as:

go to funeral :arrow: lunch provided

But take the statement "If I am to go to Scrooge's funeral, lunch must be provided". Diagram:

go to funeral :arrow: lunch provided

So the two statements are identical. "Unless" is not the only way to express exactly the same conditional.

So if "even if" appears in the negation of an "unless" conditional, it will appear in the negation of any conditional at all. That's why you're seeing it every time, and why you can always express the negation of a conditional with an "even if" phrasing.

Robert Carroll
User avatar
 AspenHerman
  • Posts: 61
  • Joined: Apr 03, 2021
|
#88461
Robert Carroll wrote: Fri Jun 25, 2021 4:21 pm Aspen,

"Even if" is not a conditional indicator. In fact, it's the opposite - "even if" indicates there is no conditional relationship between two things. That's why every negation of an "unless" statement involved "even if" in your experience. Remember, as the Unless Equation teaches us, that "unless" indicates a conditional. If I say "I won't go to Scrooge's funeral unless lunch is provided", we diagram as:

go to funeral :arrow: lunch provided

But take the statement "If I am to go to Scrooge's funeral, lunch must be provided". Diagram:

go to funeral :arrow: lunch provided

So the two statements are identical. "Unless" is not the only way to express exactly the same conditional.

So if "even if" appears in the negation of an "unless" conditional, it will appear in the negation of any conditional at all. That's why you're seeing it every time, and why you can always express the negation of a conditional with an "even if" phrasing.

Robert Carroll
Alright, thank you! I think I got it now. :D

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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