Q6 - Most apartments on the upper

[schwingrocker]

I see why E is right. But wouldn't B be a better answer because its stronger and this is a sufficient assumption question? The only reason why I can see its wrong is because it contradicts a premise (the first sentence that says "most" of the apartments have scenic views.

[timmydoeslsat]

If I said that most students in the classroom are wearing blue shirts, it would not be contradictory for me to say that, in fact, all students in the classroom are wearing blue shirts.

The idea of most and all, or even some and all, are not contradictory.

In this argument, we have a conclusion about studio apartments. This idea is not discussed in the evidence. We must have answer choice that includes this idea in it.

Even if all apartments in the building have a scenic view, that does not mean that the building actually has a studio apartment. Perhaps those kinds of apartments are not found in that building.

We have a most premise. We have a some conclusion. Expect the answer to bring along another most premise to bring about the some inference.

Example:

A most B
A most C ...[<--- Our missing link]
________
B some C

So...

Upperfloors apt building MOST sv

I am hunting for an answer choice that gives me either most Upperfloors apt building have sv OR all upperfloors apt building have sv.

Answer choice E gives us the most premise.

[mendy4u]

I didnt think any of the answers were good. But was down to B or D, I ended up settling on B due to the fact D sounds like a set up of a common flaw the LSAT uses, that if part of group A has has C and part of group B has C then some of the B and A must have C at the same time... (a Q about some hot days in smallville winds blow in from the east, and some hot days in smallville there is smog, so there must be a hot day when there is a wind from the east and it is smoggy, comes to mind).So being that this is faulty logic, how can the right answer rely on it justify the conclusion?
Is there a kind soul out there that can help me understand why this is different?

[christine.defenbaugh]

Thanks for posting, mendy4u!

First, let's make sure you're looking at the right answer key: the correct answer here is (E), not (D). I'm going to respond assuming that you meant that you were down to (B) and (E), but please let me know if that's not the case!

Now, it's great that you recognized what seemed to be a common flaw! You are completely right that if we had these two statements:

some A are B
Some A are C

We would NOT be able to make any linkage between A and C! (And good memory - that's exactly what's happening in that smog in smallville question!)

The problem here is that there is a big difference between "some" and "most". If you have our LR book, this is covered toward the end of chapter 8, but I'll run through a quick explanation now: "some" means, simply, at least one. "Most", however, means "more than half"!

Because "most" means more than half, odd things can happen when I get TWO overlapping "most" statements. Imagine I have 100 cats. Most of them are grey - what does that mean? At least 51 of them are grey. Now, I also tell you that most of them are striped - so, at least 51 of them are striped!

Now, if I have at least 51 grey, and at least 51 striped, there's NO WAY I can avoid having at least one cat that is grey AND striped. I don't know anything else, but I do know that there must be at least some overlap of grey and striped!

That's exactly what (E) is giving us. If more than half of the upper-floor-apts have scenic views, and more than half of the upper-floor-apts are studios, then there's no way to avoid at least a little overlap between scenic and studio!

If these had been mere 'some' statements instead of 'most' statements, this would not have worked!

For the sake of future students, let's take a quick spin through the remaining answer choices. First, since this is a sufficient assumption question, we have to make sure that our answer guarantees the conclusion. As timmydoeslsat points out above, the conclusion brings up the idea of "studio apartments" for the first time ever! In order to guarantee anything about studio apartments, we have to have an answer choice that tells us something about studio apartments!!

(A) doesn't mention studio apartments! If there are no studios in the building, none of this matters.

(B) doesn't mention studio apartments! If there are no studios in the building, none of this matters.

(C) DOES mention studio apartments! However, just because most of the building is studios doesn't necessarily mean that any of those studios are actually on the upper floors, or that any of them have scenic views.

(D) doesn't mention studio apartments! If there are no studios in the building, none of this matters!

Please let me know if that helps clear up a few things!

[stacksdoe]

I understand there are post above, but for me to master LR, I have to post with an unadulterated mind.

I’m going to go through this as simple as I can, but as I would during test simulation—so it has a sense of verisimilitude:
After reading the stimulus, I usually paraphrase the Main Conclusion (MC) if I can.
MC: There is at least one studio apartment in this building with a scenic view
Why: Because most of the apartments on the upper floors have scenic view

QS: what assumption allows this conclusion?

First, we have to know what type of assumption we are looking for: here, we are looking for a sufficient assumption. A piece of info that will allow us to make this a valid conclusion, because as it stands, it is clear there is a leap in reasoning.
Initially, during a timed session, I went with B, and I was very sure it was B; even when I went back through it I still went with B. However, it’s logically impossible for B to be correct, we are told “most” apartments, most – without any trepidation – means not all! Thus, there is at least one apartment on the upper floor without a scenic view—so when B states all apartments have scenic views, we know that cannot be the case. I wish I could have posted this early enough, too spot the detail of my err, but I’m guessing I glossed over the first word in the stimulus “most”; another possibility is that I may have forgotten it was an assumption question and thought it was an inference, alas, because that would still make it an err. (Question for the lsat staff, if I took a test or a LR quiz, is there any downside to reviewing it immediately after? I’m inclined to think it is highly beneficial, my thought is that it would help catch the thinking or erroneous thinking process ASAP, because I regret not doing that). Please excuse my digression, let us get on to the other answer choices.
The only other viable option is E. Let’s POE first!
A. There is no talk about ALL the apartments, and lower floors are not even mentioned.
B. Discussed above
C. This could be true, but not necessarily so. There is just no way to come up with this. And even if this was true, it still would not allow us to sufficiently say there is at least one studio with a scenic view. In addition, we don’t really know anything about most of the apartments in the whole building. Furthermore we are told with the last sentence that there is at least one studio apartment with a scenic view
D. But what does this have to do with the studio. We have no clue if the studio is on the upper floor. In fact, all the studios could be on the lower levels, and in the case, this would invalidate the main conclusion.
E. Well if studios are most prevalent on the upper level, where most of the apartments have scenic view, then for sure, we can sufficiently say that—inductively-- one of them has a scenic view. Furthermore, it is likely many of them have scenic view because most of the upper level rooms have a scenic view.
Lastly, and this just came to me a few minutes ago (and i vehemently detest things like this): apartments vs studio apartments, so we are to assume they are one in the same? I know detail is a major part of the lsat, so little stuff like this sometimes throws me for a loop. Looking back, a 2 bedroom apartment, a studio, a four bedroom apartment, a one bedroom apartment, they are all the same in one respect, that is, they are apartment units; but during testing, that played on me.
I did a lot of paraphrase and rephrasing above, but I wanted to do this just like I would during a live test.
I’m not a big fan of inductive arguments, too much probability and not enough certainty; but that is the game of sufficient questions, right??
What say you? Any feedback or comment is welcome with alacrity and open arms!!!

[stacksdoe]

Thanks for posting, mendy4u!

First, let's make sure you're looking at the right answer key: the correct answer here is (E), not (D). I'm going to respond assuming that you meant that you were down to (B) and (E), but please let me know if that's not the case!

Now, it's great that you recognized what seemed to be a common flaw! You are completely right that if we had these two statements:

some A are B
Some A are C

We would NOT be able to make any linkage between A and C! (And good memory - that's exactly what's happening in that smog in smallville question!)

The problem here is that there is a big difference between "some" and "most". If you have our LR book, this is covered toward the end of chapter 8, but I'll run through a quick explanation now: "some" means, simply, at least one. "Most", however, means "more than half"!

Because "most" means more than half, odd things can happen when I get TWO overlapping "most" statements. Imagine I have 100 cats. Most of them are grey - what does that mean? At least 51 of them are grey. Now, I also tell you that most of them are striped - so, at least 51 of them are striped!

Now, if I have at least 51 grey, and at least 51 striped, there's NO WAY I can avoid having at least one cat that is grey AND striped. I don't know anything else, but I do know that there must be at least some overlap of grey and striped!

That's exactly what (E) is giving us. If more than half of the upper-floor-apts have scenic views, and more than half of the upper-floor-apts are studios, then there's no way to avoid at least a little overlap between scenic and studio!

If these had been mere 'some' statements instead of 'most' statements, this would not have worked!

For the sake of future students, let's take a quick spin through the remaining answer choices. First, since this is a sufficient assumption question, we have to make sure that our answer guarantees the conclusion. As timmydoeslsat points out above, the conclusion brings up the idea of "studio apartments" for the first time ever! In order to guarantee anything about studio apartments, we have to have an answer choice that tells us something about studio apartments!!

(A) doesn't mention studio apartments! If there are no studios in the building, none of this matters.

(B) doesn't mention studio apartments! If there are no studios in the building, none of this matters.

(C) DOES mention studio apartments! However, just because most of the building is studios doesn't necessarily mean that any of those studios are actually on the upper floors, or that any of them have scenic views.

(D) doesn't mention studio apartments! If there are no studios in the building, none of this matters!

Please let me know if that helps clear up a few things!

christine,

Thank you a butches for your post. The "studio" component is one I was completely oblivious to. And I know this already, that terms need to match up. I know this fallacy, its called "The fallacy of Four Terms (Dolan, JohnI) . I'd give an example, but its too late. Anywho, thank you again Christine.
This is always bites, reviewing and realizing you missed one that was pretty straight-forward and simple, almost a gimme.

Can anyone offer feedback a bout my post below, or better yet, can one one create a 2nd best assumption, one that would be close but not as strong as E.
Thank you folks!

[ohthatpatrick]

I'm not sure I understand what you're looking for (or why you want an inadequate answer).

Sufficient Assumption is lovable because it's black or white: our answer choice, combined with the evidence, either allows us to 100% derive the conclusion, or it doesn't.

This problem is just playing off one of the two big Quantity Overlap Inferences:

Most A's are B
+ Most A's are C
-----------------------
Some B's are C

fyi,
the other big Quantity Overlap Inference is

All A's are B
+ [some other fact about A, connecting it to C]
--------------------------------
at least some connection between B and C