In/Out Grouping | LSAT Logic Games
LSAT Lab
Views: 1928
Like: 48
In/Out Grouping games are a tricky game type designed to measure if-then reasoning. Properly notating conditional relationships and quickly linking them together is key to success in this game type.
0:00 Intro
0:14 Frequency
0:39 Agenda
1:02 Example Game
1:37 Gameboard
3:01 Rules
4:57 Inferences
6:53 Question 1
8:29 Question 2
10:59 Question 3
13:09 Question 4
15:10 Question 5
18:04 Closed vs. Open
19:40 Subgroups
22:00 Frames
26:21 Summary
Experience the power of personalized learning when you take a free practice digital LSAT.
Get our latest videos when you subscribe to the LSAT Lab YouTube channel.
19.09.2021
So from what I am gathering, regarding question 5, is that because the sufficient conditions only talk about what is OUT, then the rule will not trigger. If the sufficient conditions were talking about what pieces must be IN, then the rule would trigger because of the necessary condition, which HAS to be true. So I am focusing on the sufficient conditions and what they say, not the necessary condition as it is irrelevant here as the rule is talking about what is OUT. Hopefully this makes sense/is correct! Thinking out loud haha
Thanks for this!
I have searched and cannot find one instance of an "unless rule" like the one in this problem, and seeing as 99% of the comments are people being confused, why don't you make an updated video for this concept instead of complicating it with an extremely rare example that is not tested. Just seeing as this is the top video when you type in "LSAT logic games grouping", I think you should go back and remake the video at this point just so people can see these rules illustrated in a better way. Whether or not your right, the fact that for an instructional video you're having to individually re-explain the video to every comment should show that this video is not doing what was intended.
N is a third wheel in the relationship with M and O. If O is not available then M will take N. Same with O if M is unavailable.
This is not a good explanation for in and out logic games !!! Anyone who is inexperienced with logic games should find another video as this will delay your learning process instead of help it!!! 4:17
what i infer from the first condition is that both (M and O) are selected, unless N is selected, in which case if N is selected then M and O are not selected. the word used is "AND" which binds them together.
I'm so lost on his explanation for question 2
Rule 1 is about the dumbest thing I've seen in a logic game
Q2: how come E is not an option? How did you know to go from negative to positive?
Do you have a video explaining the negative to positive and positive to negative relationships between players?
watching all this integrating just tryng to figure out all relevant times we need to apply contrapositive concept
For G1 Q3, how come P does not HAVE to be selected if L is out? How come L out doesn’t have to result in P In?
On the question with the maximum, doesn't LMNO being selected violate the first rule, M & O are selected, unless N is selected
Was this an actual game on the LSAT?
I sincerely hope not. The use of “unless” in the 1st rule makes no sense based on how it’s being explained. The rule says M AND O are selected, unless N is selected. “Unless” in this context should be considered a condition for M AND O not being selected together. It should make NMO impossible.
Hopefully this was just an attempt at making a logic game.
I was very confused about the wording with the first rule, but i think I have figured it out, "M and O are selected, unless N is selected." and i initially guessed that it'd mean "M and O <-> not N", with its contrapositive being "N <-> not M or not O". However after writing it down and really thinking about the wording I think I see where my error was, M and O are selected UNLESS N is selected. While in common day to day language this would imply that N being selected makes both M and O being selected impossible, however when taken very literally, N's selection just makes not M or not O both possible. In other words, N being selected doesn't negate the possibility of M and O, merely makes either/both not being selected a possibility. if my initial understanding with the bi conditional was intended, the LSAT would use the terminology "If and only if", not just "unless". While I now understand what the test was saying, it does seem a bit needlessly complicated and relies more on memorization of the LSAT's specific use of language as opposed to actually testing any logical thinking skills.
I'm really not understanding how the max stones that could be selected is 4, when rule #1 states that M and O are selected UNLESS N is selected. Doesn't that mean that if N is selected then M and O can't be selected together? Which means you can't have LMNO. Either LMN or LON. That would mean that at most 3 stones could be selected. Unless I'm missing something.
This was so helpful thank you
i am confused about rule 1 I thought if both m and o guarentee no n then if there would be an n then neither of them chould be present so in other words there cannot be an mn no or mon is that correct?
in question 2, how do you determine that it needs to go from neg-pos and not pos-neg?
I notice that the Logic Questions are each subject to individual methods for selecting the correct answer . For example ' Tree Ordering ' – or as it relates to this particular question – In / Out Grouping . The first question discussed here is difficult less due to it being a ' Logic Game Question' and primarily due to wording which is vague . Selected / Unselected – M O P / T L N . The line of questioning that follows , and how to correctly visualize a correlation between them and the correct answers is , once again , vague . Other ' Logic Game ' questions – although of equal or greater difficulty have a greater clarity of understanding and continuity between the initial ' Stimulus ' and the following ' Line of Questions ' . #GreysonCassidy 🇺🇸Temporary Staffing Agencies
how do you know in question 2 that it needs to go from out to in? the question does not say that. At least one is selected means 1 or more than one. Is this game a LSAT game?
The interpretation of the first rule is wrong. You turned it into an “or” and it clearly states “and”. M “AND” O are selected, unless N is selected. M and N can not be selected, neither can O and N.You even left answer D in as a valid answer when reviewing the first rule. And that even violates your arbitrary “or” condition you made up. All three can not be selected.
It's easier on my brain to write this way the first rule. "UNLESS N is selected" M and O are selected, equivalent to:
[ no N] on the LEFT ==> M and O. Contra is then easy / [no M] or [no O] ==> N. The key is to remember that the word UNLESS, flips the equation and negates only the item that is after the word UNLESS. That's the only thing to remember because it's not " logical" and we will get confused if we don't flip right away. You went straight into the contrapositive and most got confused how you got there.
Thank you again!
Rule #1 really kicked my ass LOL, it's so confusing. Anyone else feel the same?
I know a lot of people have asked about this, but I don't understand how M, O, and N can all be selected. The rule indicates that UNLESS N is selected, M&O will be selected. I took this to mean either M or O must be out for N to be in.Would it be more accurate to interpret the rule as- M&O must both be selected, unless N is selected, in which case the previous statement does not apply. So if N is selected, there is no obligation to include/exclude either M or O.Is the problem with my initial analysis that I took M+O to dictate N, while it is actually the absence of N that dictates M+O?
The first rule is really tripping me up. I see your explanation to legalpeach as "either M and O are selected or N is selected, or both." but the unless word in my head keeps saying if N is selected than both M & O together can't be selected. I'm not understanding how the three can be selected at the same time.
VERY helpful!!! Thank you
You contradict yourself at parts or you're making it very confusing for a lot of us. How can L,M, and O all be together. Or M and O be together alone? Doesn't that make the first rule incorrect??
Im confused by this entire method
Anyway you could go over problems from PT 91?
The reason M and N can both be in it’s because N is the necessary condition. When you satisfy the Necessary condition the rule falls off, meaning M becomes a floater and it can be in or out.
Thank you for posting this! I'm still a bit confused by the first rule though.
Doesn't it also mean that if N is selected, than either M or O isn't (or both aren't) and that if M and O are selected, then N isn't, making it function like a "if and only if" rule?
That is, is the rule saying "M and O are selected unless N is selected, in which case at least one of M and O is out" or is it really saying "M and O are selected unless N is selected, in which case M and O may or may not be selected"?
Totally confused by rule number one. I agree with what you WROTE…if M or O is NOT selected then N IS selected. However, you SAID if M or O is not selected, then N is NOT selected. Which is correct?
I am confused about the role of P in the chain especially in question 2. Can we infer that P -> /T ? If not, what is the correct contrapositive of the entire sequencing chain? Thanks.
How would you know if you need multiple game boards? I'm having trouble figuring out when I need just one board or multiple boards
I keep getting tripped up by the wording. "M and O are selected, unless N is selected" made me think that neither M or O would be selected if N was present.
Thank you for the video. They are super helpful!
For G1 Q2, can you elaborate a little more on why it has to be from negative to positive? And if it's at least one, can't both T and L be selected?
I don't agree with your first rule about crossing out m and o if n is selected. The rule states m and o ARE selected UNLESS n is selected. So if no N, then yes M and O
Are N and L conditional? Could it be reversed so that if L is selected, N is selected? Or is just if N if selected, L is selected?
I keep commenting sorry but I feel like the word “and” between M and O is what is tripping me up. Is it that it’s saying “M AND O are in unless N is in” but its NOT saying that they cannot be paired individually with N? And the only answer that rules this out is D. Sorry if this is utterly confusing, it’s the only way my brain can make sense of it – if that’s decently correct
i fawnd u dada
Hi can you do videos on technique for logical reasoning? Like the stem “which one of the following comparisons is utilized by the argument?” Thanks! Keep doing reading Comp! It’s the hardest section on the lsat lmao 😭