Many people do not understand themselves, nor do they try to gain self-understanding. These people might try to under...
Julie-VJuly 30, 2019
Diagramming the Stimulus
Hi LSAT Max,
How would we diagram "without self-understanding it is impossible to understand others"?
Also, is the conclusion diagramed as: not SU => not UO
SU= self understanding
UO= understanding others
Thanks!
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
This question is a great example of a circular reasoning flaw, where the conclusion simply restates one of the premises.
Julie-VJuly 31, 2019
Thank you for clarifying that Irina! I think when I was doing the problem I forgot whether "without" introduced nec. or suf.
RaviAugust 1, 2019
@Julie-V, happy to hear Irina's answer clarified things! Let us know if you have any other questions!
camcaniDecember 6, 2021
I still do not understand the diagramming for the without section of the sentence. I see the conclusion as not SU => not UO. For the without part I see, "UO => SU". To me that looks exactly like the contrapositive. In that case, is that the reason why it would be considered circular reasoning?
jakennedyJanuary 18, 2022
Hi @camcani,
Exactly! As Irina said, the conclusion restates one of the premises, making this a circular reasoning flaw. Your diagrams are correct.
NewtMay 27, 2024
I still don't understand the "without" part. I thought without introduce a necessary condition with would be diagramed as not UO => SU.
Emil-KunkinMay 28, 2024
I think it's important to understand the whole meaning of the Sentence or clause. Here we are told that without understanding oneself one can't understand others.
What does this guarantee? We know that someone who doesn't understand themself can't understand others. That is, if not understand self, then not understand others. The contrapositive would thus be if understand others, then understand oneself.
