So, if you assume that every premise given to you in the question is true, why are we assuming that there is a male Sue? There was no evidence given to prove that and disprove the premise that "anyone named Sue is a girl" ? Very confused, that is very contradictory.
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
The point of this example was to show that sometimes, albeit rarely, the LSAT will give premises that are very obviously flawed. The vast majority of the time, you should assume that every premise is true; however, the LSAT will occasionally throw in a premise that is very obviously flawed as in this example where it claims that anyone named Sue is a girl.
It is very rare that you will run into one of these so you can safely assume that the premises presented to you are true. This example was just presented so you keep the potential of a flawed premise in the back of your mind while you are working through questions.
Hope this is helpful! Let us know if you have any further questions.
