October 2010 LSAT Section 1 Question 27

As it is presented in the passage, the approach to history taken by mainstream U.S. historians of the late nineteenth...

LoganL on October 13, 2021

Question 4 game 3

C is stated as the correct answer but on the hypothetical that we worked through it has z not 1st if z is not first then O is before L according to the reverse of rule 2. Does C not break this rule?

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

Already have an account? log in

Jay-Etter on January 24, 2022

Hi Logan,
Remember that for contrapositives not only do we negate both sides but we also have to reverse the conditions. When our original rule is:
Z1 -> L-O,
Our contrapositive is
If L not before O (or, if O-L), -> Z not 1
Because L-O is the necessary condition in the condition, it can exist on its own. That's why we can have L-O without having Z in 1. Hope this helps!