| Author |
Message |
|
mshermn
|
Post subject: PT59, S1, G2, Q10 - A museum curator is arranging  Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 10:18 pm |
|
 |
| LSAT Geek |
 |
Thanks Received: 451
Posts: 1647
Joined: October 07th, 2009
|
I have copied this post from frankchen007_86.
Why answer choice (D) is correct?
coz once Hibiscus is placed in position #1, Magnolia in #3/#2，while Fence positions in #7，the set out violates the condition stated in (D) but conforms to the original conditions.
I m so confused. Can anyone shed some light?
Furthermore, is there any effective tactic to crack this kindof condition substitution Qs?
they appear intensively in PT58,G2Q12 as well.
Thanx
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
mshermn
|
Post subject: Re: PT59, S1, G2, Q10 - A law firm has 7 departments Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 10:36 pm |
|
|
| LSAT Geek |
|
Thanks Received: 451
Posts: 1647
Joined: October 07th, 2009
|
We know that
H -- K
We also know that G immediately precedes K.
GK
So, we can combine these two constraints to get
H -- GK
Answer choice (D) is an equivalent rule substitution because it keeps H in front of K. If H is 2nd, then H is not first, and since G and K must show up consecutively, K will need to show up behind H. If H is not 2nd, then H must be between M and G and therefore between M and K.
Your hypothetical with H one does not conform to the original constraints. Remember that H must not be first!
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
This post thanked 1 time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
gethornburg
|
Post subject: Re: PT59, S1, G2, Q10 - A museum curator is arranging Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:30 pm |
|
Thanks Received: 0
Posts: 8
Joined: June 29th, 2010
|
if we proceed with the sufficient and necessary conditions as suggested by the answer ...
~MHG > H2
f h m (i l gk, l i gk, gk l i, gk i l
~H2 > MHG
but, notice it does not say H2 > ~ MHG
m h i l g k f
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mrudula_2005
|
Post subject: Re: PT59, S1, G2, Q10 - A museum curator is arranging Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 4:57 pm |
|
Thanks Received: 4
Posts: 143
Joined: July 29th, 2010
 |
First Responder |
| September, 2010 |
|
What's wrong with (C)?! Correct me if I'm wrong (and I suppose I am), but doesn't (C) just mean that H must be in slot 2, 3, 4, or 5? Or when they say it must be between the 1st and 6th, they mean to INCLUDE the 1st and 6th (which clearly H cannot occupy)? This wording is a little trippy to me... clarification would be much appreciated  thanks!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
imasexybastard
|
Post subject: Re: PT59, S1, G2, Q10 - A law firm has 7 departments Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:31 pm |
|
Thanks Received: 0
Posts: 12
Joined: December 06th, 2010
|
Could you please explain why B does not satisfy the condition? It too keeps H in front of K, and it does not allow H to be the first photograph. Is it that the "either F or M is first" is too restricting? mshermn wrote: We know that
H -- K
We also know that G immediately precedes K.
GK
So, we can combine these two constraints to get
H -- GK
Answer choice (D) is an equivalent rule substitution because it keeps H in front of K. If H is 2nd, then H is not first, and since G and K must show up consecutively, K will need to show up behind H. If H is not 2nd, then H must be between M and G and therefore between M and K.
Your hypothetical with H one does not conform to the original constraints. Remember that H must not be first!
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tianfeng102
|
Post subject: Re: PT59, S1, G2, Q10 - A law firm has 7 departments Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:39 pm |
|
Thanks Received: 3
Posts: 29
Joined: August 23rd, 2010
|
Because the following sequences are allowed in the original setup: ILMHGKF or LIMHGKF In other words, choice B is too restrictive. imasexybastard wrote: Could you please explain why B does not satisfy the condition? It too keeps H in front of K, and it does not allow H to be the first photograph. Is it that the "either F or M is first" is too restricting? mshermn wrote: We know that
H -- K
We also know that G immediately precedes K.
GK
So, we can combine these two constraints to get
H -- GK
Answer choice (D) is an equivalent rule substitution because it keeps H in front of K. If H is 2nd, then H is not first, and since G and K must show up consecutively, K will need to show up behind H. If H is not 2nd, then H must be between M and G and therefore between M and K.
Your hypothetical with H one does not conform to the original constraints. Remember that H must not be first!
Hope this helps.
_________________
LSAT could change from demon to darling, if you tame the beast (PrepTest) one after another in 60 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
daniel.g.winter
|
Post subject: Re: Q10 Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 9:54 pm |
|
Thanks Received: 4
Posts: 17
Joined: June 20th, 2011
|
Is E wrong because it places a constraint on Fence that makes it only go in spot 1? And thus, it's also changed one of the original constraints of the game? I chose E and it looks okay at first glance.
It basically gives us F--H--GK
So H cannot be first since F must come before it, and K is always after H. I'm at a loss as to why it's wrong. It has to be because the original constraint on F says F must be 1st or 7th, but this new rule would make it that F can only be 1st. Am I on the right track?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mshermn
|
Post subject: Re: Q10 Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 2:40 am |
|
|
| LSAT Geek |
|
Thanks Received: 451
Posts: 1647
Joined: October 07th, 2009
|
daniel.g.winter wrote: Is E wrong because it places a constraint on Fence that makes it only go in spot 1? And thus, it's also changed one of the original constraints of the game? That's exactly what's wrong with answer choice (E). It would not maintain the original set of constraints because it would imply that F could not be 7th, which the original set of constraints permitted. It's really important that when you select an answer to this sort of question, that all of the implications of the original set of constraints are maintained, and no more. Answer choice (E) introduces a new restriction on the game not originally there. Nice work!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Connect with Manhattan LSAT
