I just made a video explanation for the fourth LSAT Logic Game from PrepTest 34 (October 2000 LSAT). It's the "doctors and clinics" game (Randsborough, Souderton, Juarez, Kudrow, Longtree, Nance, Onawa, and Palermo).

I explained all questions in one video that's just under 14 minutes. (Get more free LSAT videos.)

Enjoy!

***

For more, see my more-detailed written Logic Games explanations available on the blog.

Thanks Steve for taking on this question. Making the inference that L can't be at S certainly didn't pop out at me, but I am certainly relieved that I was writing out the rules correctly.

ReplyDeleteThanks for the explanation. But why not N/J and O/P or K/P under the S? Is there some rule here to select such dual options from the conditional chain? Look forward to the explain. Thanks again.

ReplyDeleteI am wondering the same thing. Is there a concrete answer?

DeleteI think that both could have worked, but he simply chose to use N/P & O/J. Realistically, because it is one big chain you could have mixed the variables a bit. I wish he had been a bit clearer about that in the video because I spent some time trying to figure that out too.

DeleteSteve, could you please explain why you didn't write N/J under S? Thank you so much.

DeleteI must be missing something terribly obvious. I'm with "Q" here... Anyone have and explanation?? Help, please!

ReplyDeleteDon't K and J have the relationship where they can't be at the same clinic together too? I thought the first rule established that they have to be at different clinics...so wouldn't that make #23 A?

ReplyDeleteWondering the same thing.

DeleteI definitely agree, "A" should be a viable answer.

DeleteI was stumped on this one as well, but finally figured it out. As per rule #1:

DeleteIf Js, then Kr

The contrapositive of this would be:

if Ks, then Jr

So we know that if one of them is at S, then the other is at R. However, none of this says anything about them both being at R. So for example:

If Jr, then Kr or Ks.

If Kr, then Js or Jr.

Basically if one of them is at S, then the other is at R. Or both of them are at R.

Oscarzoroaster is right. We have to be REALLY REALLY careful about inferring that 2 things cannot be together when it comes to splitting games. Make sure to write out the conditional statement and then look at its contrapositive. So, as Oscar mentioned, if Js then Kr, contrapositive is Ks then Jr. But what if we have the necessary condition of either? If we have Kr or if we have Jr, that doesn't tell us anything, so we can't make any inferences. I think Oscar explains it better above.

DeleteA perfect example of a question that I would either blindly guess or completely skip!

ReplyDelete