Diagram

[cyruswhittaker]

Can you please help me to formulate the templates for this question?

I creates two different chains based on rule three and its contrapositive, but it became very messy and ultimately made me feel less certain about my answers (as well as more time consuming).

Thanks.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

[sbuzzetto10]

How should we decide on a game like this with relative ordering and conditionals, whether framing is a good idea? I never can decide!

For example: 52/2 Game 3 (a bread truck makes exactly one delivery...) 51/4 Game 3 (a courier delivers exactly eight parcels....)

When should we take these conditional restraints and create frames and when should we forgo this method? If we can't use frames on these, is there another efficient method? These games take FOREVER without some frames to work from!

Thanks!

LSAT TOMORROW! probably should have asked this earlier but was just going over the game from 60. If you get back to me in time--aweswome, if not no biggie!

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Good question. Look for an either or scenario usually established in one of the following three ways:

F precedes G, or else F precedes H, but not both.

This creates two possibilities:

G - F - H and H - F - G

F precedes G, or else F follows H, but not both.

This two creates two scenarios:

F precedes both G and H or else F follows both G and H

Also look out out for the following:

F - G <--> G - H

This also creates two scanarios after you check the contrapositive:

F - G - H and H - G - F

In short it's not frequent that conditionals create a binary scenario but rather constraints that sound like either/or scenarios.


Good luck tomorrow!

[kdeclark]

I'm a little confused. I played this game by setting up two frames, one with M - P and H - G, and the other with P - M and G as a floater.

What's the problem with setting it up this way? I was under the impression that every time we come across a conditional we can set up two frames, one where the antecedent is satisfied, the other where its not. Is there danger lurking here?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

As long as you left G as a floater in the frame where P preceded M, you'd be fine. Did you have any difficulty adjusting the tree to reflect the frame when "M precedes P?"

If not, you're fine! Remember, there is not just one way to approach LG. I generally avoid using conditionals as establishing my frames, because while they give you information if the sufficient condition occurs, they don't give you any information about what happens when the sufficient condition does not occur.

So in your frame when P precedes M, you are not able to infer anything additionally. But I don't see any harm here in setting up the two scenarios M -- P and P -- M. You just don't get additional information regarding the frame where P -- M.

I think i'd avoid it more for the sake of building good habits - it's generally not very useful to follow conditionals this way.

[labetterman]

The initial diagram can have more added to it to help fly through these questions. We know that both J and H cannot be first or second since they both have two preceding requirements.

Also, we know that L cannot come 5th since it has two letters that must come after. Also, H and J are the only options for the sixth slot since G, P, L, and M are all easily ruled out.