Diagram

[bcdrnec]

Could some one please show me how they diagrammed this? I know its a Binary Grouping game and was really excited to see it on the test, as I had been doing well with them.

I was doing fine up until the final constraint and for some reason my brain will not let me get this correct!

Thanks!

B

[noah]

Here's a diagram for this game.

PT 58, S3, Game 2 - Employee Volunteers - Manhattan LSAT.pdf

(26.54 KiB) Downloaded 1959 times

As for #12, the correct answer is a pair of which at least one of the members must volunteer. In other words, it would be impossible for both of the members (in the correct answer) to not volunteer. So, another way -- albeit a strange one -- that the LSAT could have asked this is "Each of the following pairs could both NOT volunteer EXCEPT?"

Tell me if that doesn't clear it up or if you have further questions.

[Rendona001]

Hi,

I need help with this game and #7 for some dumb reason I can't figure it out. I diagramed it correctly and also did the contrapositives for each conditional but I may just need some more practice with In/Out games I answered (B) seeing if R is in then M is and if M is in then T and if T is in then ~F or ~V. I didnt see RMT so went with answer (B). Please help! Thank you

[LukeM22]

Is there a hard and fast rule re: in what orders the variables should be listed down the Logic Chain? The ordering on the diagram works great but it doesn't seem like something that would be intuitive at the time of the game, as they aren't listed in order of being introduced in the stimulus, nor by order of the rules.

[ohthatpatrick]

No hard and fast rule, but the general technique is this:

When you're starting with your first rule, put those 2 or 3 characters somewhere in the middle of where you're planning to draw your logic chain, because you want to allow yourself the flexibility to put other people above or below those characters.

I start with R and M somewhere in the middle of my page.

R .... R
M.... M

Then when I see the next rule involves M and T, I choose to put T below the M, so that this rule can be compact.

R .... R
M ... M
T .... T

Then when I see the next rule is S and V, I say "defer!" since it didn't involve R, M, or T.

Then when I see the 4th rule involves R and L, I put L above the R.

L ... L
R ... R
M ... M
T .... T

Then when I see the 5th rule involves T, F, and V, I know I'm going to put F and V below the T. But, should I put FV or VF? I look around and see that the remaining rule (the 3rd one) involves V but not F. Thus, I want V to be at the bottom, so that I can attach someone to V.

L ... L
R ... R
M ... M
T .... T
F .... F
V .... V

Now that I'm at my last rule, which involves S and V, I know to put the S below the V.

Hope this helps.

[StephanieK821]

Hi Noah,

I'm still having trouble answering number 12. Could you walk me through the answer choices? Thank you!

Here's a diagram for this game.

PT 58, S3, Game 2 - Employee Volunteers - Manhattan LSAT.pdf

As for #12, the correct answer is a pair of which at least one of the members must volunteer. In other words, it would be impossible for both of the members (in the correct answer) to not volunteer. So, another way -- albeit a strange one -- that the LSAT could have asked this is "Each of the following pairs could both NOT volunteer EXCEPT?"

Tell me if that doesn't clear it up or if you have further questions.

[ohthatpatrick]

I'm going to just write a scenario with as many people out as I can.

We'll put R and M and T all out (just grabbing names from the first couple rules) and see where that leaves us.

_____________ | R, M, T

The 4th rule would say that L has to be in

L | R, M, T

Can I throw out the remaining people too? S, V, and F?

Almost. If S is out, then V is in. Okay, so how about this:
L, V | R, M, T, S, F

I've scanned the rules to verify this is legal, and it is.

Which answers can be eliminated based on this arbitrary could be true scenario?

(A), (D), and (E).

Looking at (A), we'd say that "F and T aren't a pair of people such that at least one member volunteers". After all, we just saw a possible scenario in which neither of them volunteer.

This question stem is tricky to paraphrase, but it's saying:
1 CORRECT ANSWER: two people, at least one of whom is always IN
4 WRONG ANSWERS: two people who could both be OUT (at the same time)

We just proved that F and T can both be out.
R and S can both be out.
S and T can both be out.

So we're down to (B) and (C).

Let's test (B). Could L and M both be out (or does at least one need to volunteer)?

________ | L, M

Does anything happen when L is out, or when M is out?

According to rule 4, if L is out, then R is in.
According to rule 1, if R is in, then M is in.

So it's impossible for L and M to both be out.

L being out forces R in, and R being in forces M in.
Now we know that (B) is the answer, since L and M cannot both be out.

If a pair of people can't both be out, that means the same thing as "at least one of them will always be in".

We could have disproven (C) by showing that L and V could both be out.
for example,
R M T S | F V L

Hope this helps.