June 2010 LSAT Section 5 Question 14
The author uses the word "immediacy" (line 39) most likely in order to express
1 Reply

Skylar on February 8, 2020
@LeekLuu, happy to help.You seem to understand the rules correctly, but these rules are only applied in order to find the contrapositive of an S->N statement.
We can deduce the following S->N statement from the passage: DFW -> M and I.
We then apply each of the rules (reverse, negate, change "and" to "or") in order to find the contrapositive of this statement: Not M or Not I -> Not DFW.
The question asks us what "can be logically inferred." It does not specifically ask what the contrapositive is, so the answer does not necessarily have to be a restatement of the contrapositive.
(C) states: Not M and I -> not DFW. This is correct. Again, we are not asked to find the contrapositive, we are only asked to identify the valid inference. So, if we are told that we have an electorate who is not moral but is intelligent, could we then conclude that the democracy does not function well there? Yes, because we know from the contrapositive that we need either a lack of morality or a lack of intelligence to conclude that the demoracy does not function well, but we don't necessarily need both. Since we have "not M," we can conclude "not DFW" and the "I" is irrelevant.
(D) states: not DFW -> not M and not I. This is incorrect because only the reversal of the contrapositive.
Does that make sense? Please let us know if you have any other questions!