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

sangagul1234ah@gmail.com on January 17, 2021

second rule example 2

If X-some-Z and Y ---> Z I don't understand why we can't make the deduction X-some-Y. How does the explanation "we don't know how many Zs or Xs we have" matter in this situation? Isn't this also the case in the first example of Rule 2?

Replies

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

Already have an account? log in

sangagul1234ah@gmail.com on January 17, 2021

Never mind. I got it.

I didn't think about the fact that we can't do Z--->Y

shunhe on January 21, 2021

Glad you figured it out! Let us know if you have any further questions.