u/HumbleHits

I'm enjoying the explanations. Literally how I'd react IRL. Need more of this and looking forward to the future explanations hehe

Also like their LR ratings, keeps me in check. As well, if anyone knows, should I be questioning the structure of the argument or the real world common sense of the argument? If that makes sense

Like for example:

if I am a wizard, then I have a blue hat

Therefore, If I am not a wizard I don't have a blue hat.

^ Flaw is sufficiency/necessity confusion

Just I be looking for the structure (immediately we know its sufficiency/necessity confusion) first, or should I be questioning the real world logic that I can not be a wizard and yet still have a blue hat? Or will it come naturally both of these concepts?

Thanks

Hello,

I'd like some help negating an answer choice below:

Original AC:

"Any substance of medicinal value contained in plant species indigenous to tropical rain forests will eventually be discovered if those species are studied by scientists."

Would the negation be:

"Any substance of medicinal value contained in plant species indigenous to tropical rainforest will NOT eventually be discovered if those species are studies by scientists."

"Some substances of medicinal value contained in plant species indigenous to tropical rainforest will NOT eventually be discovered ..."

Or is it just:

"Some substances of .... will eventually be discovered if ..."

Do I negate both "any" and "eventually found", or just one?

Thanks!

Just Started Using LSATDemon

Negation for Necessary Assumption