#25 - Interior decorator: All coffeehouses and restaurants

[RickyLW]

Hi there! I solved this question using a slightly different series of diagrams and would appreciate it if someone could confirm whether my method was valid.

This is how I diagrammed the initial relationship:
PP(well-designed) Artwork

I used a Double-Not Arrow to capture the second relationship:
2) ~Comfortable PP(well-designed) Artwork

Then, I noted the final relationship and added its contrapositive to my chain in 2):
Comfortable SI
Contrapositive: ~SI ~C

My final diagram looked like this:
~SI ~C PP(well-designed) Artwork

This leads to the inference that ~SI ~PP(well-designed) and the contrapositive that PP(well-designed) SI, which matches the correct answer.

If these diagrams are correct, then I would also welcome any advice on how to streamline this process in the future, as this question took me quite some time to complete. Thank you!

[Jeff Wren]

Hi Ricky,

Overall, your diagrams look good to me.

You may find that simplifying:

~Comfortable PP(well-designed)

to:

PP(well-designed) -> Comfortable

will make this problem a bit easier/more streamlined as it gets rid of an unnecessary double-negative

Also, I'd be careful diagramming the final relationship as:

Comfortable SI

Because it is missing the "public place" term (PP) which is stated in this relationship. While it doesn't necessarily make a difference in this question, the LSAT could have had a wrong answer that omits "public places" and just uses comfortable. In other words, we don't know whether private places that are comfortable all have spacious interiors.

Finally, while you didn't diagram it, you do need to note that all restaurants and coffeehouses are public places (as stated in the first sentence of the stimulus), because that needs to be established in order for Answer D to be correct.