LSATMax and COVID-19:
Amid these difficult times, we're lowering the price on all courses.
Free LSAT Practice
LSAT Practice Test
LSAT Practice Test Videos
eBook: The Road to 180
Law School Top 100
LSAT Test Proctor
LSAT Logic Games
Apple App Store
Digital LSAT Simulator
Campus Rep Internship
Fee Waiver Scholarship
LSAT Test Dates
LSAT Message Board
November 2018 LSAT
Consumer: A new law requires all cigarette packaging to display health warnings, disturbing pictures of smoking-relat...
on January 9 at 06:16AM
how to negate answer D?
on January 13 at 03:56AM
Thanks for the question! (D) is tricky argument to negate because weâ€™re negating a conditional statement. First, letâ€™s diagram out (D). Itâ€™s an unless statement, and recall that we can diagram â€œX unless Yâ€ as ~Yâ€”>X. So, applying this to (D), we have
PFLP = people frequently look at the packaging (when taking out cigarettes)
NPASMHP = new packaging affects the smoking habits of people
~PFLP â€”> ~NPASMHP (where â€œ~â€ is shorthand for not)
Now, Iâ€™m going to walk through the formal logic of how to negate the sentence first. We can express pâ€”>q as ~p v q. This is because either p or ~p happens. If ~p happens, obviously, we can conclude ~p. If p happens, we can conclude q by the conditional. Thus, if we know that pâ€”>q, we know that either ~p, or q.
Now we can negate this statement, which gets us p & ~q. This is the negation of the conditional. Applying this to our example, the negation is ~PFLP & NPASMHP.
Letâ€™s walk through this in English. Letâ€™s take an example to understand this. Letâ€™s say we have the following: if I eat this chicken sandwich, I will be full. Whatâ€™s the negation of this? Something thatâ€™s true when this is false and vice versa is the following statement: I ate this chicken sandwich, and I am not full. That shows that the conditional isnâ€™t true, since the sufficient condition happened but the necessary condition didnâ€™t. This, in our example, the negation of (D) occurs when people arenâ€™t frequently looking at the packaging when taking out cigarettes, but the packaging is still affecting the smoking habits of people. And this makes sense. How do we negate a sentence that tells us that X wonâ€™t happen, unless Y happens? Show that X did happen, even though Y didnâ€™t happen. Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.
Posting to the forum is only allowed for members with active accounts.