Questions about diagramming.

[smile913]

Hi,

I was working on Game #3 : December 2004 Questions 13-17 (p. 340 of LG Bible) and
noticed that the rule "Neither Ty nor Raimundo appears in any photograph that Wendy appears in." could be split in to two (1. Ty does not appear in any photograph that Wendy appears in. 2. Raimundo does not appear in any photograph that Wendy appears in) and diagrammed as T W and R W.

If so, can I safely assume that a "Neither A nor B" type rule is actually two rules combined?
Also, can I split "Either A or B is W" type rule into two as well and then diagram as A W
and B :arrow:W ?

I am also concerned with a rule that appeared on Game #1 : October 1996 Questions 6-12 (p. 324 of LG Bible) :
" If both G and S are reduced, W is also reduced".
Can I split the rule and diagram as G W and S W ?
If so, would the contrapositive be not W not G or not W not S ?

I am so sorry for bombarding you with questions. Your reply would be of immense help.
Thank you.

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Smile,

Thanks for the questions! Normally we split questions about different games into different threads, but since the base idea you are inquiring about is similar, you were right to post them together

The ideas you are talking about are tricky, and so a while back I wrote two blog posts on these very topics. Let's start by looking at those, and then if you have questions after reading them both, please come back here and post about it, and I'll reply. How does that sound?

The two posts are:

• Diagramming LSAT Conditional Statements 101: "And" in the Necessary Condition
  
  Diagramming LSAT Conditional Statements 101: "Or" in the Sufficient Condition

I think those will answer both questions for you, but if not, we'll keep talking about it. I look forward to hearing back from you soon. Thanks!

[smile913]

Dear Mr. Killoran,

The posts were very helpful! My questions are solved, and I am no longer confused with those concepts.
Thank you very much.