#11 - Unless the residents of Glen Hills band together, the

[amna.ali467]

Hi there,

I know that since this stimulus has conditional reasoning and it's a must be true question, I should look for a repeat or a contrapositive answer. I'm having difficulty setting up the conditional relationship and the contrapositive though, which is why the right answer isn't completely making sense to me. So if you could help me set up the conditional relationship and the contrapositive that would be helpful.


Thanks,

Amna

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Hi Amna,

The reasoning here is basically one long string. Here's what I have:
Don't band together proposal approved apartments built new residents overcrowded schools and roads new roads built residential tax increases
This is somewhat unusual, but basically every single piece of information builds on and connects to the piece of information before it. Does that help?

[jiyounglee]

Could you elaborate further how you have connected all the conditions?

I have put

Approve Glen Hills band together

therefore, contrapositive would be

Glen Hills band together Approve to rezone

Then,

Approve build water and sewer systems and new apartments

I am confused how to draw conditional diagram here

These bulidings would attract new residents, and the increased populations would probably result in overcrowded schools and would certainly result in roads so congested that new roads would be built

Shouldn't it be

new residents buildings

(why would you put new residents as necessary condition? these buildings would attract new residents. Therefore, shouldn't buildings a necessary condition? while I was reading this, I was also thinking cause and effect relationship. I prephrased in my mind that new buildings (cause) attract new residents therefore increase population(effect)

Same for following arguments,

overcrowded schools and congested roads new residents

new roads overcrowded schools and congested roads

For second last sentence

Neither new roads nor additional schools could be built without substantial tax increases for the residents of Glen Hills

I drew

New roads and additional schools substantial tax increase

For last sentence

this growth might even destroy the rural atmosphere that makes Glen Hill so attractive

Glen Hill attractive destroyed rural atmosphere Growth

[Jonathan Evans]

"Unless the residents of Glen Hills band together, the proposal to rezone that city will be approved."

~GHBT PRZA

CP: ~PRZA GHBT

"If it is, the city will be able to build the water and sewer systems that developers need in order to construct apartment houses there."

PRZA ABW&SS

CP: ~ABW&SS ~PRZA

"These buildings would attract new residents, and the increased population would probably result in overcrowded schools and would certainly result in roads so congested that new roads would be built."

ABW&SS BNR

CP: ~BNR ~ABW&SS

"Neither new roads nor additional schools could be built without substantial tax increases for the residents of Glen Hills."

BNR STI

CP: ~STI ~BNR

"Ultimately this growth might even destroy the rural atmosphere that makes Glen Hills so attractive."

This last statement is superfluous.

Zero in on the definite relationships, the definite sufficient and necessary conditions. Attempt to excise the "might be"/"could be" fluff from a string of conditionals. Do not overthink conditionals and create unnecessary intermediate steps.

Also key, expect to find a credited answer choice in these string conditional Must Be True questions that addresses at least one end of the terminal chain of reasoning, be it at the beginning or the end.

[jiyounglee]

Im not still clear how to draw a diagram for cause and effect relationship.

So, for Sufficient and necessary conditional diagram,

I have learned to put

sufficient necessary.

Then, to apply this format in cause and effect relationship,

is it correct for me to put

effect cause?

I do understand that intermediate sentences are not necessarily for me to breakdown in this case however, I would like to know for future reference.

For example,

These buildings would attract new residents and the increased population

Is this same as

new residents and increased population buildings?

Thank you in advance!

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Great question! You actually have it backwards, though; you want to diagram like this:
cause effect

If you think about it, this makes sense; the effect follows as a result of the cause, so the cause comes before the arrow.

When you apply that to the example you gave, the buildings are resulting in new residents and increased population, so the diagram looks like this:
buildings new residents and increased population

[jiyounglee]

Thank you so much for clarification!

[EmilyLSAT22]

Hi, I am confused because in the first sentence, I thought the word "unless", a necessary condition indicator, was modifying the phrase "residents of Glen Hill band together." Is that not correct? Thank you!

[Adam Tyson]

It is correct, Emily! In our explanations in this thread, though, we have diagrammed the contrapositve as well as the original claim. As presented, that first sentence is:

Proposal Approved Residents Banded Together

The contrapositive, which Jonathan used to start a very powerful and complete conditional chain, would be:

Residents Band Together Proposal Approved

These two diagrams are logically equivalent, which means that they mean the same thing as each other no matter which way you look at them.

Well done, you understood it perfectly! Now you just need to get a little better at seeing the contrapositive as being the same as the original claim, and you'll be golden.

Good luck!

[EmilyLSAT22]

Ahh, okay, I see that a lot more clearly now. Thank you, Adam!