June 2010 LSAT Section 5 Question 18

Based on the passage, it can be concluded that the author and Broyles-González hold essentially the same attitude toward

Ncontrer18 on November 20, 2019

Typo?

Is there a typo on one of the Argument missing premise flash cards? The question is: P: C->notD P: P:notD some X My answer was x some c. The answer is written on the card as C->X and its contrapositive as x some c.

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Skylar on November 22, 2019

@Ncontrer18,

This is a good question. Your answer of "X-some-C" is a correct missing premise that connects the other two.

However, the answer written on the card- "C->X" - is also correct.

Remember that, if we are given A -> B, we can conclude B-some-A assuming A exists. This is what the answer on the card is doing. If the missing premise is "C->X" we can conclude "X-some-C," which would connect the other two premises.

It is important to note that the contrapositive of "C->X" is "not X -> not C." The card is written in a way to show that "X-some-C" is another valid conclusion we can deduce from the statement "C->X."

Does that help? Please let us know if you have any other questions!