Back to notes
In what way could Solomon's double dipping in fresh cocktail sauce be considered a correct contradiction?
Press to flip
It's a correct contradiction because it directly conflicts with the rule that Solomon only double dips when the sauce is low.
Explain a situation where a correct answer contradicts a conditional statement.
A correct answer violates a necessary condition set by a conditional statement, such as stating a condition that must happen for something else to be true, and then showing an instance where it doesn't happen.
How does a direct contradiction function in must be false questions?
A direct contradiction involves identifying explicit conflicts between different statements, directly opposing the given information.
How can unnecessary details distract you in must be false questions?
Unnecessary details can divert your attention away from the critical statement relationships and conditions that indicate contradictions.
Why is diagramming useful in analyzing conditional logic?
Diagramming can provide a visual representation of conditions and relationships, making it easier to identify contradictions.
How do incompatibilities differ from direct contradictions?
Incompatibilities occur when statements are the least compatible or inconsistent with each other without being outright oppositional.
Why is conditional logic crucial for must be false questions?
Conditional logic helps spot contradictions by focusing on terms like 'only if' or 'unless,' which set necessary conditions that can be violated.
Provide an example of a wrong inference in the example analysis about Solomon's behavior.
An incorrect inference would be concluding that using a wet-nap is impolite, which doesn't directly contravene the given behavior rules.
What correct contradiction was showcased in the shrimp blogging example?
The correct contradiction involved the weight inference, such as stating heavier shrimp are eaten now which conflicts with the idea that heavier shrimp were eaten a month ago.
What are the key indicators for identifying 'must be false' questions in the LSAT logical reasoning section?
Keywords like 'must be false' or 'cannot be true' and the absence of typical argument language, focusing instead on statements.
What study tip helps in anticipating possible contradictions?
A key tip is to focus on understanding and practicing with conditional logic, and to recognize common structures in reasoning.
Describe how combining multiple facts could lead to a correct contradiction in must be false questions.
Combining facts may lead to an inference that directly conflicts with another fact or established condition, showing inconsistency.
What are some traps to avoid when answering must be false questions?
Trap answers include those that are unopposed, out of scope, weak, or incorrectly supported by the passage.
What is the importance of focusing on facts rather than arguments in these types of questions?
Focusing on facts helps you identify the relationships and potential conflicts without getting distracted by persuasive elements typical in arguments.
Why are conditional words like 'unless' common triggers in must be false questions?
'Unless' sets a necessary precondition, and any statement violating this condition serves as a direct contradiction.
Previous
Next