Subscription pricing
With regards to the second rule, does anyone know why we can't simply place both F&G in out group? JY's explanation suggests placing G (Out) in one world and F (In) in the second world.
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-1-game-3/
0
3 comments
That's a great explanation! thank you!
, does anyone know why we can't simply place both F&G in out group?
We can but that's only one possibility.
so our rule says when F out -->G out (in this case both F and G are out like you said)
Now lets take the contrapositive of this:
G in ---> F in ( in this case both are in)
But is this the only possibility?
We know what happens when F is out, but what about when F is in?
If F is in, G can be out or in. This is because we don't have a rule about what happens when F is in. (But our contrapositive already gives us one of the possibilities when G is in F is in, so the only other possibility left for us to write down is: F in G out.
Now lets take a look at G: we already know what happens when G is in (F is in), but what about when G is out? F can be whatever it wants to be, our rules don't trigger anythings, so F can be in or out. Our original rule already gives us a scenario where F is out and G is out, the only one left is F in G in, which we already noted down when we tried to figure out the possibility for when when F is in.
So now we have 3 possibilities:
F out G out
G in F in
F in G out
If you had only stayed with the world of both F out and G out, you would have missed another possible world where F is in and G is out.
I hope this helped and answered your question. : )
With the second rule, we have three possibilities:
F out G out (which forces H in)
F in G in (which forces H out)
F in G out (H floats)