#2 - Global, Could Be True

[Dave Killoran]

Complete Question Explanation
(The complete setup for this game can be found here: lsat/viewtopic.php?f=174&p=88228#p88228)

The correct answer choice is (A).

Answer choice (A) is correct because as shown in Template #1, W can be the sole signee of agency S (T can sign with F or P). This becomes a difficult question if you make the mistake of believing that the last rule creates a TW block. Remember, conditional rules are only active when the sufficient condition is met (or the necessary condition is not met). If T does not sign with S, then W can sign with any agency (as long as the remaining rules are met, of course).

Answer choice (B) is incorrect because assigning W, Y, and Z to P leaves only T to sign with S, which creates a violation of the last rule because W is unavailable to sign with S as well.

Answer choice (C) is incorrect because if Z signs with the same agency as X, from the third rule Y must also sign with that agency, which is a violation of the second rule.

Answer choice (D) is incorrect because if Z is the only performer to sign with S, then Y signs with a different agency, which is a violation of the third rule.

Answer choice (E) is incorrect because if three performers sign with F, those performers would have to be X, W, and T (Y and Z cannot sign with F due to the first three rules). But, this creates a violation of the numerical minimums because only Z and Y remain, and they must both be assigned to the same agency, leaving one agency with no signees.

[cocross]

Please advise.

From my understanding of contrapositives, the rule if T signs with S then W signs with S, the opposite would assume that If T does not sign with S then W would not sign with S.

This problem made questions 2-4 incorrect.

Thanks for you help!

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Cocross,

Thanks for the question! Let's take a look at how this fourth rule works. First, the rule is conditional and can be represented using an arrow diagram:

TS WS


In the above I used subscripts to represent the agency, hence the sub-S for each term.

Now, you mention the "opposite," but given the wording of your post I think you meant the contrapositive. I make a distinction here because the opposite of a rule (such as the logical or polar opposite) is not the same as the contrapositive, and logically there are times when we need the opposite (such as when negating statements). To take the contrapositive, we both reverse AND negate the terms, and doing so would leave us with:


WS TS


Of course, there are only three agencies, so when one is eliminated from contention (in this case, S, the Star Agency), that means the performer in question must sign with one of the other two agencies (F or P). This insight allows us to rewrite the contrapositive in a more "positive" or non-negated form:


WF/P TF/P


Thus, the rule states that if T signs with S, then W signs with S; the contrapositive can be reduced to if W signs with F or P, then T signs with F or P (they don't have to sign with the same agency, though).

Since it looks like your contrapositive was slightly off above, I'm thinking this will now help questions #2-#4 make more sense. Is that the case? Please let me know, and if not I'll go into more detail on each. Thanks!