#21 - All too many weaklings are also cowards, and few

[Dave Killoran]

Hi,

Can you eliminate (A) and (E) as answer choices simply because they have no flaw in their reasoning pattern?

Thanks in advance.

Yes, you can! Our instructor Laura Carrier referenced (E) having valid reasoning earlier in this thread, but (A) hadn't been addressed. But it doesn't contain a flaw either

[na02]

I'm not grasping how "Few ... fail to be ..." translates to "some"
Couldn't few technically encompass all? So it could be the case that few fail to be = few are not = might be the case that all are not?

Thank you!

[KelseyWoods]

Hi N!

There are definitely some confusingly worded statements in this stimulus! "Few cowards fail to be fools," as Brook mentioned, is a fairly loose wording. "Few" is not directly synonymous with "some," especially in this phrasing. Saying that "few cowards fail to be fools" is not emphasizing that some cowards are not fools, it's emphasizing that some cowards are fools. Hence the interpretation that some cowards are fools.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[caylastracke]

Hi,

I'm trying to better understand the wording in question 21 of Oct 99, section 4 LR.

For the purposes of the LSAT, I know that "some" can mean "all" and at least "not none", but are "some" and "most" also equivalent in meaning?

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi caylastracke

Great question! The words "some" and "most" have some overlap on the LSAT, so let's think through what that means.

The word "some" means anywhere from 1-100% of the time.
The word "most" means anywhere from 51-100% of the time.

That means that if you have most, you also have some. For example, if I use most of the paper towels, I have also used some of the paper towels. That makes intuitive sense based on how we use words in every day life as well.

It doesn't work the other way, however. If you have some, you don't necessarily have most. So if I tell you I've seen some of the new season of the Twilight Zone, you don't know I've seen most of it. I could only have seen the first five minutes of the first episode. I could have seen all of it. I could have seen all of it. (I actually have seen the first four episodes---highly recommend when you aren't busy studying!)

In context here, we treat "all too many" as the word "some," because we don't know what the author thinks are "all too many." Is one percent of weaklings being cowards too many? Is fifty percent? They don't define it, so the most we can say is that there is at least one weakling who is a coward (which equals "some"). It's the same situation with the phrase "few fail to be...". We don't know exactly how many "few" would mean here, so the best word to choose is "some."

Hope that helps!
Rachael

[lsatStudent567]

Hi there,

I would just like to reply to Brooks' answer concerning the conditional language in question 21. In particular, would it not make more sense to diagram the phrase "few cowards fail to be fools" as most cowards are fools or C F? This phrase means that it is a minority of a cowards who are a fools which is equivalent to, a majority of cowards are fools. I realize that this doesn't have much of an effect when it comes to answering the question, but I think it is an important clarification to make. Thank you!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi lsatStudent567!

I can definitely try to unpack the wording further on this question.

You write,

C F. This phrase means that it is a minority of a cowards who are a fools which is equivalent to, a majority of cowards are fools.

It seems like this sentence is a bit contradictory, in as much as it claims that the above conditional reasoning is both saying a minority and a majority of cowards are fools (if only a minority are fools, then it cannot be the case that a majority are fools as well, and vice versa). The conditional reasoning C F is equivalent to saying "most cowards are fools."

More directly addressing the language "few cowards fail to be fools," it seems like the word "few" is potentially a sticking point. We can't infer too much about what the word means here. For example, we know that "few" refers to more than one. However, we don't know beyond that--it might be the case, for instance, that "a couple" (i.e., two) would also count as constituting a "few," or a word like "some" might either refer to just one or it might refer to a few.

We therefore only know that the word "few" refers to some amount more than one--i.e., that "more than one coward fails to be a fool." This would be written as cowards fool. This is different from knowing a claim about "most."

[Jay]

Hello. Thank you always for your help.

So,

"Few" = Almost None. (1 ~ 49 %). "A few" = Some. (1 ~ 99 %)

When I say "Few A's are B", I can diagram as "Few A's -> B." ( or "Almost none of A's -> B")

From this, can I also say, "Some of A's -> ~ B" ? (Here, I assume A can only be either B or ~ B)

I just wanted to ask this because if "few cowards fail to be fools" is same as saying "Some cowards are fools", then "Few A's -> B" and "Some of A's -> ~ B" would be the same.

[Adam Tyson]

Let me start by addressing these, Jay:

"Few" = Almost None. (1 ~ 49 %). "A few" = Some. (1 ~ 99 %)

Actually, "few" is a very subjective term, and I would hesitate to put a range on it as you did. I definitely would not be comfortable saying it means "almost none." All I would say about it is that it means about the same thing as "not many," which isn't very exact either because "many" is also entirely subjective. So the statement "few cowards fail to be fools" could mean that every coward is a fool, or that most cowards are fools. I'm not sure if that statement would still be true if half of all cowards were fools and half were not, but thankfully the LSAT tends not to test us on those gray areas very much.

"A few" is also subjective. It means at least some, usually more than one (I can't think of a case where it would be correct to use it to indicate just one, but I'll allow for the possibility), but not many (whatever that means). If a few of my neighbors are unemployed, it's probably safe to say it's at least two, and it's probably also safe to say it is not all, but as to how many or what percentage I just can't say. More context would be needed. But that means that "a few" is NOT the same as "some", because "some" means anything more than zero. That could be just one, or it could be 100%. "Some of my neighbors are unemployed" means at least one of them is, and maybe they all are. So don't equate those ideas in your analysis of any LR stimulus that uses those terms!

[jimmy1115]

Hi,

So can I understand 'few A are not B' to mean that 'some A, but not all and not most, are not B', but more importantly, 'Most A are B'?

I am trying to understand what emphasis should be placed upon and how to diagram when facing these kinds of statements (few are not), our emphasis should be placed on 'most are' instead of 'few are not' right, hence diagram it accordingly.

Thank you,

Best,
Jimmy