Diagram

[gregory.mortenson]

The soup game.

I am having trouble finding the inferences to help unlock this game. The last constraint is throwing me off: "The mushrooms are added at some time before the tomatoes or the kale, but not before both."

I understand what this constraint is saying, but don't know how to effectively and efficiently incorporate it into my master diagram.

What is the best way to incorporate a rule such as this?

[noah]

Just to make sure, let me quickly review what it means:
that it's either T - M - K or K - M- T, and these are relative rules, not fixed positions.

Usually this sort of constraint makes me wonder if I should make frames, but for this one, it doesn't make sense to do so, since there aren't other rules that get triggered by those situations. So, I just marked those possibilities to the side.

In general, I didn't find a lot of inferences in the beginning of this game. I simply had:

M3 --> L6 T - M - K or K - M - T
Z1 --> L - O

And then put restrictions on M in slot 1 and 6, and on T and K in slot 5.

The questions turned out to be rather straightforward application of the rules instead of depending on figuring out a lot at the beginning -- tell me if there are any with which you're struggling.

- Noah

[mlee.cortez]

Hi Noah,

The T-M-K or K-M-T gave me a headache. Am I violating this rule by having both T and K after M?

I interpreted the rule to mean that one of the two (K *or T) followed M (relatively) (hence why the answer to question 2 is letter C: M cannot be added first), but I didn't feel this rule restricts the instance of having K *and* T follow M.

Avoiding both K and T allowed me to get all the questions right.

Also, is it right to say that there aren't that many inferences that one can get after setting up the problem and considering the constraints?

Please confirm.
Thank you for your assistance.

[noah]

Hi Noah,

The T-M-K or K-M-T gave me a headache. Am I violating this rule by having both T and K after M?

I interpreted the rule to mean that one of the two (K *or T) followed M (relatively) (hence why the answer to question 2 is letter C: M cannot be added first), but I didn't feel this rule restricts the instance of having K *and* T follow M.

The rule says that M must come before K or T, but not both, so it has to be in between them (relatively, not necessarily immediately). Perhaps this analogy will help: As part of a hazing ritual, you need to dunk yourself into a freezing cold pool twice. Because of local safety laws, you must drink one hot beverage during the ritual, but to make the dunking ritual somewhat difficult, you can only have that drink at some time before one of the dunks, not both. So, one of the dunks needs to be done before the hot drink, and the other afterwards.

That's wild that you could solve all the questions by avoiding two elements -- I wonder how that worked . . .

Also, is it right to say that there aren't that many inferences that one can get after setting up the problem and considering the constraints?

Yes, I agree, there was not much to infer.

[mlee.cortez]

Thanks for clarifying, Noah.

Just to clarify, I meant to say that when I avoided M-K-T, I got the correct answers.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Here's a setup for this game as well as a walk through for questions 3 and 5.

Let me know if you still need further help with this one!

[velvet]

What do you guys think of notating conditionals directly under the slots? So for M3 --> L6, I would put M under slot 3 and draw arrow towards 6 with L under it.

Just trying to see if others do this and if it's a good idea. I know in some cases notating underneath isn't viable like Z1--> L-O...

Also, I notice most of Manhattan's setups don't write out the contrapositives for conditionals. Is it not worth writing out contrapositives for games? Or maybe only in 'conditional-heavy' constraints is it worth it?

Thanks in advance.

[timmydoeslsat]

It really is not practical to do that. It would be difficult to draw out hypotheticals quickly having to do that. Plus, as you have seen, many conditionals do not render themselves diagram-friendly. It is my opinion that it is better to simply keep the conditionals out to the side of your set up.

I find it to be a waste of time to write out the contrapositives. Others like to see it visually, but one can look at a conditional statement and see its contrapositive with no effort.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

I agree with Timmy on both points!

I think that writing the conditionals under the slots is probably not going to work out great for you. For example, what about a constraint that says, "if L precedes O, then M is last?"

And on writing out contrapositives. I find that they're great for beginners and those who have difficulty seeing the contrapositive. But the more contrapositives you write out, the more rules you have to investigate as you operate the game. Keeping the rules simple and clean is a good approach to speeding up the game.

Eventually, you'll just start noticing when you've placed a character contained in a constraint or placed a character into a position used in a constraint. So given the constraint, "if L is third, then M is fifth." You'll start checking that rule, anytime you've placed L, M, or a character into either the 3rd or 5th positions.

Good luck!