Most Strongly Supported LSAT Blogs

So they asked me to write something about an LSAT-related topic I’ve been thinking about.  So, being friendly-neighborhood-Trent, I complied.  Then they asked for another one, and so I popped another one out.

Problem is that I might not have considered the relationship between the content contained therein.

In class, I always have an impossible time trying to convince people that there are many conditional claims they’ve accepted as true, and yet have failed to conjoin.  So, I argue, many people will accept ‘A implies B’ and also accept that ‘B implies C’, but because these lie at the periphery of their minds, or because they’re lazy, or whatever, people commonly fail to recognize that they’ve accepted two claims which jointly allow an inference.  So these same people might well fail to draw the inference that ‘A implies C.’  No one ever buys this story because they claim that you’d have to be a fool to (a) accept both propositions as being true and (b) fail to recognize their relation to one another.  I still think it’s super common, but perhaps that’s because it’s just common for me.  And by common I mean it might have just happened to me.  As in some readers have thought you could do that with my last two posts.  Sucks.  But here’s how it lays out….

(more…)