Restrictions and Split Blocks

[apatel23]

On page 83 I encountered a practice rule that I misinterpreted, according to the book. Although, I'm fairly certain that I was right the first time and the book is false.

Example:

"A doctor must see six patients -- C, D, E, F, G, and H -- one after another, not necessarily in that order. The patients must be seen according to the following conditions:
E is seen exactly three patients after C
D is seen immediately before F is seen"

After reading the first rule I concluded that there would be three spaces between E's position and C's position, like so:
C _ _ _ E. According to the book the interpretation of the rule goes: C _ _ E.

Since the rule states E is seen three patients after C, wouldn't that mean that E is the 4th patient? If the rule stated E is the third patient seen after C, then I could seen the book's interpretation, but with this statement I believe my first assumption is correct.

Can anyone provide some insight into this? I'm positive that I might face a question like this in the future and would like to avoid making a mistake since that misinterpretation would greatly change the outcome.

Thanks in advance for any help!

[Dave Killoran]

Hi A,

Thanks for the question. Fortunately, the book is right here (whew!). The block you've drawn represents three spaces between C and E.

To see why the block is drawn as is, first look back at pages 43-45 of the book. Then consider the placement of C and E. For example, let's just imagine that C is the first patient seen. So, C = 1. If E is seen three patients after C, wouldn't E be 4th (E = 4)? Yes, it would. That would translate to a C __ __ E block (or 1 __ __ 4), which is is how the book represents that block.

Looking at your explanation, I think you might have confused yourself, because you explicitly state that, "Since the rule states E is seen three patients after C, wouldn't that mean that E is the 4th patient?" If you put our rule representation onto the diagram, that's exactly what happens. Yours (with three spaces between) puts E in 5th.

The whole idea of spaces before and after is a tricky one, and hopefully when you look at pages 43-45 again, that will clarify it a bit more. But if not, let me know and I'll go into more detail.

Thanks!

[UnicornChainsaw]

Hi Dave,
I am having some issues with this concept as well.

"E is seen exactly three patients after C"

C G (Patient one) D (Patient two) F (Patient Three) E H

In this scenario E would be after the three patients (G, D & F) which are after C.

If it was set up like this:
C D (Patient one) F (Patient two) E (Patient Three) G H
Then wouldn't E be after 2 patients after C.
If it is looking for the C _ _ E then shouldn't it say, E is the third patient after C.

Is this just one of those things you have to lock in you mind regardless of how incorrect (irritating) it seems??

Thank you for your help!
UC

[Adam Tyson]

Hi UC, thanks for the great username and your question! "Three patients after" does not mean that there are three patients in between them, but that there are TWO in between them. To make that more obvious, let's change it to one patient after. IF E is the FIRST patient after C, then E would be the very next one after C. We would usually just say "next" in plain English, but the LSAT doesn't always use plain English. So if first after means none in between, then second after means one in between, and third after means two in between. See how that works? They love to mess with us using that kind of language.

Try looking at it another way: my friend John lives two doors down from me. What does that mean, both logically and commonly? It means that there is one house between us. From my house, walk down and count two doors, and John is at the second one.

Or try this: you are on line at the grocery store, and you are three people after the current customer being rung up. There's the guy that's one person after him, then the guy that is two people after him, and then there's you. You are three people behind, but there are only two people between you. See how that works?

So, the rule that E is three patients after C is diagrammed as C _ _ E, with two spaces between and E being the third one after C.

If they wanted to say that there were three people in between C and E, they could do it a few ways. One is just the way I did right there - "there are three people between C and E" (although that doesn't imply that C is before E, and it could be the other way around). Another is "E is immediately after the third patient after C".

Watch out for that kind of language! They use it often, and it is meant to confuse you in just the way that it did here. With practice you will never again fall for it. Good luck!

[UnicornChainsaw]

Thank you so much! That cleared up my confusion.

-UC