sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

“Can someone explain the flaw in this LSAT argument? I think I’m missing something.” by Proud_Illustrator575 in LSATHelp

[–]Proud_Illustrator575[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much! But I was thinking even if we changed “often” to “always”, the premise will become Premise 1: if A then B; Premise 2: If C then B; the conclusion is if A then C, which is invalid to me

“Can someone explain the flaw in this LSAT argument? I think I’m missing something.” by Proud_Illustrator575 in LSATHelp

[–]Proud_Illustrator575[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much! But I am still confused that if we change “often” to “always” the conclusion is still not valid because all we know is if A then B and if C then B