Since we have been working on some logical reasoning : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 22 Jan 2017, 17:25

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Since we have been working on some logical reasoning

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 325 [9] , given: 0

Since we have been working on some logical reasoning [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2005, 09:35
9
KUDOS
21
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

22% (01:06) correct 78% (00:02) wrong based on 14 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Since we have been working on some logical reasoning questions I'm going to try to collect the principles I'm following here for everybody's reference. Please feel free to discuss and add more.

If X then Y
This is the equivalent of: If non Y then non X.
Example: If it rains, then I will take an umbrella with me. I don't have a umbrella with me. That must mean it is not raining.

This is NOT equivalent to: If Y then X, or If Y then non X, or if non Y then X. In fact, if we know "If X then Y" and Y occurred, X may or may not happen.
Example. If it rains, then I will definitely take an umbrella with me. I have a umbrella with me today. Is it raining? It may or may not be raining. I said if it rains I will take an umbralla with me. But I could also take an umbralla with me just for the sake of it, even if it doesn't rain. By the same token, if it is not raining, do I have an umbralla with me? I may or may not have.

Using symbals:
X->Y<nonY>nonX
These two below are the same thing:
nonX->Y<nonY>X
X->nonY <Y>non X

Y if and only if X
This is the equivalent of: If X then Y, AND if Y then X. Also, if non X then non Y. If non Y then non X.

Example:
I will take an umbralla with me if and only if it rains. If it rains, then I have the umbralla with me. If I have the umbralla, then it must be raining. If I don't have the umbralla, then it mustn't be raining. If it isn't raining, then I don't have the umbralla with me.

Y unless X
This is the equivalent of: If non X then Y. Also, if non Y then X.

Example:
I will take an umbralla with me unless it is sunny. If it is not sunny, I will take an umbralla with me. If I don't have an umbralla with me, it must mean that it is sunny. However, if it is sunny, I may or may not take an umbralla with me. If I have my umbralla with me, it may or may not be sunny.

Last edited by HongHu on 30 Mar 2005, 08:56, edited 4 times in total.
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 13 Oct 2004
Posts: 236
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2005, 11:52
This is sticky material!!.
Abstracting the info given in the stem is the way to attack the formal logic/paraellism questions. I was trying to keep all the information straight in my head and do the saurya's campaign stop q under 2 mins and got it wrong. I will internalize this, thanks.
VP
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 1440
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 38 [3] , given: 0

Re: If X then Y [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2005, 12:18
3
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Good job....to put this in our heads mathematically, u can deduce these.

----> just like we inverse inequality sign when we multiply -ve, we can perhaps do the same for X---> Y

1) For X--> Y......-ve on both sides will give.....(non Y ----> non X)...note the relation is reversed i.e. Y to X now

2) For (non X ----> Y)......multiply-ve on both sides.....(non Y ----> X)

3) For (X----> non Y).....multiply-ve on both sides.....(Y-----> non X)

Just a thought on mathematical approach for easier recollection.

Last edited by banerjeea_98 on 02 Mar 2005, 12:38, edited 1 time in total.
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 325 [0], given: 0

Re: If X then Y [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2005, 12:26
Good strategy! I'm making this sticky.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 40

Kudos [?]: 429 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2005, 20:03
Great post Honghu, it is often not easy to verbalize such abstract concepts
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 325 [3] , given: 0

Necessary Conditions vs Sufficient Conditions [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Mar 2005, 10:19
3
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Necessary conditions:

If A is a necessary condition of B, that means A must happen for B to happen. In other words, if B happened, A must be true. If A is not true, then B can't happen.

In summary: If B then A. If non A then non B.

Example: I will take my umbralla with me only if it rains.
Raining is a necessary condition for my taking the umbralla with me.
If it is not raining, you can be sure that I don't have my umbralla with me.

Sufficient conditions:

If A is a sufficient condition of B, that means if A happens B must happen. In other words, if B did not happen, A must be false.

In summary: If A then B. If non B then non A.

Example: I will take my umbralla with me if it rains.
Raining is a sufficient condition for me to take the umbralla with me.
If it is not raining, you are not sure whether I have my umbralla with me. But if I don't have my umbralla with me, you can be sure that it is not raining.

Necessary and sufficient
If A is a necessary and sufficient condition for B, that means if A happen B must happen, and if A does not happen, B does not happen. In other words, A=B. It is equivalent with B if and only if A.

In summary: If A then B. If B then A. If non B then non A. If non A then non B.

Example: I will take my umbralla if and only if it rains.
If it is raining, you can be sure I have the umbralla. If it is not raining, I don't have the umbralla. If I have my umbralla with me, you can be sure that it is raining. If I don't have it with me, it mustn't be raining.
Manager
Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 246
Location: Rockville
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Mar 2005, 11:27
This is seriously an awesome post, our forum here is worth more than any kaplan course!:read
You guys are awesome!
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5062
Location: Singapore
Followers: 30

Kudos [?]: 358 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Mar 2005, 17:27
Thanks Honghu, just what I was looking for ever since we've been working on logical reasoning CR question types, recently.
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 325 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 08:43
We have to be careful about sometimes, always, and never.

If A = always doing something
then non A = not doing something sometimes

If A = never doing something
then non A = doing something sometimes

If A = doing something sometimes
then non A = never doing something

If A = not doing something sometimes
then non A = always doing something

For example:

Birds sing sometimes. A never sings. Therefore A is not a bird.
Birds don't sing sometimes. A always sings. Therefore A is not a bird.

Compare to:

Birds always sing. A doesn't sing sometimes. Therefore A is not a bird.
Birds never sing. A sings sometimes. Therefore A is not a bird.

Compare to:
Birds sing sometimes. A sings sometimes. Is A a bird? We don't know. A may be a person who sings sometimes.
Birds sing sometimes. A doesn't sing sometimes. Is A not a bird? We don't know. A maybe a bird who sings sometimes and doesn't sing the other times.
Manager
Joined: 25 Oct 2004
Posts: 247
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 15:47
Hong Thanks for the post its really awesome!!!
Manager
Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Posts: 167
Location: NJ
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Mar 2005, 11:38
Oh this is a gr8 post
Thx Hong...
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1218
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 609 [0], given: 0

Re: Necessary Conditions vs Sufficient Conditions [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Mar 2005, 00:42
HongHu wrote:
Necessary conditions:

If A is a necessary condition of B, that means A must happen for B to happen. In other words, if B happened, A must be true. If A is not true, then B can't happen.

In summary: If B then A. If non A then non B.

Example: I will take my umbralla with me only if it rains.
Raining is a necessary condition for my taking the umbralla with me.
If it is not raining, you can be sure that I don't have my umbralla with me.

.

Hi, HongHu, first thanks for your great post.
I have a question. We often heard about a necessary condition is not a sufficient condition.

Does that mean it rains, but I may take or not take an umbrella?
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 325 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Mar 2005, 05:50
Yes, that's very good. If raining is the necessary condition of me bringing the umbrella, then if I have the umbrella you know that it must be raining. However, if it is raining, I may or may not take the umbrella with me.
CEO
Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Posts: 3281
Followers: 23

Kudos [?]: 465 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

25 Mar 2005, 00:27

however

Holding an undergrad degree is not a sufficient condition for admission to School X since only 20% of applicants with undergraduate degrees are accepted each year
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5062
Location: Singapore
Followers: 30

Kudos [?]: 358 [0], given: 0

Re: If X then Y, Help for CR [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2005, 23:42
HongHu wrote:
Since we have been working on some logical reasoning questions I'm going to try to collect the principles I'm following here for everybody's reference. Please feel free to discuss and add more.

If X then Y
This is the equivalent of: If non Y then non X.
Example: If it rains, then I will take an umbrella with me. I don't have a umbrella with me. That must mean it is not raining.

This is NOT equivalent to: If Y then X, or If Y then non X, or if non Y then X. In fact, if we know "If X then Y" and Y, X may or may not happen.
Example. If it rains, then I will definitely take an umbrella with me. I have a umbrella with me today. Is it raining? It may or may not be raining. I said if it rains I will take an umbralla with me. But I could also take an umbralla with me just for the sake of it, even if it doesn't rain. By the same token, if it is not raining, do I have an umbralla with me? I may or may not have.

Using symbals:
X->Y<=>nonY->nonX
These two below are the same thing:
nonX->Y<=>nonY->X
X->nonY <=>Y->non X

Y if and only if X
This is the equivalent of: If X then Y, AND if Y then X. Also, if non X then non Y. If non Y then non X.

Example:
I will take an umbralla with me if and only if it rains. If it rains, then I have the umbralla with me. If I have the umbralla, then it must be raining. If I don't have the umbralla, then it mustn't be raining. If it isn't raining, then I don't have the umbralla with me.

Y unless X
This is the equivalent of: If non X then Y. Also, if non Y then X.

Example:
I will take an umbralla with me unless it is sunny. If it is not sunny, I will take an umbralla with me. If I don't have an umbralla with me, it must mean that it is sunny. However, if it is sunny, I may or may not take an umbralla with me. If I have my umbralla with me, it may or may not be sunny.

Hi Honghu,
for the if x then y section, you have this sentence: "This is NOT equivalent to: If Y then X, or If Y then non X, or if non Y then X. In fact, if we know "If X then Y" and Y, X may or may not happen. "

I think you meant: "In fact, if we know "If X then Y", then X may not or may not happen if Y occurs (y->not sure)"

Is that right ?
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 325 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Mar 2005, 08:55
Yes, I meant If X then Y and if we know that Y occurs, X may or may not happen. I'll add the word "occurs" in the text for easy understanding. Thanks.
Director
Joined: 04 Jul 2004
Posts: 904
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

11 Apr 2005, 16:04
1. My Dog Dylan loves being brushed. At the moment, he is not a happy doggie, so I can't have just brushed him.

If X, then Y => Not Y, then Not X
if I brush my Dog, he will love it => He is not happy, I can't have brushed him
CORRECT LOGIC.

2. Dylan barks loudly when he is alarmed or frightened. One night I woke up when he barked fiercely. I concluded that he must have been either alarmed or frightened, so I tiptoed down the stairs expecting to find a burglar in the house. Was my conclusion a logical one?

When Dylan is alarmed or frightened ==> Dylan barks loudly
Dylan barked loudly ==> alarmed or frightened.

Wrong Logic

Correct logic is :
If X, Then Y ==>
a) X then Y or
b) Not Y, Not X

Please correct me if I am wrong.
Director
Joined: 04 Jul 2004
Posts: 904
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

11 Apr 2005, 16:05
1. Whenever the red light is on and the green light is off, it means that the protection shields are no longer in place covering the uranium core. The protection shields are covering the uranium core, yet the green light is off. This means that the red light must be off also.

Logic:
(A)
If a, then b => Not b, Not a

(B)
If Not(X and Y) ==> (X is true, Not Y) or (Y is true, Not X): Correct Logic
If Not(X and Y) ==> (X is Not true, Y true) or (Y is Not true, X): Wrong Logic

So, in the question:
(red is on) and (green is off) ==> (No Protection shield)
using (A)
(There is Protection shield) ==> Not((red is on) and (green is off))

Now we have for second Part (using B):
Not((red is on) and (green is off)) ==> (green is off), (red is off) [x, not y]
So logically Correct.

2. My biology text book tells me that no birds are mammals. I conclude that no mammals are birds.
No birds are mammals.
=> X (no birds) -> Y(mammals)
=> No Y [no (mammals)] -> No X [no (no birds)]
=> no mammals -> birds
Logically Correct.

3. Our leisure centre had a budget of Â£100,000 last year to be spent on a swimming pool costing Â£60,000 or a gymnasium costing Â£55,000. We went ahead and ordered the swimming pool to be built. Therefore we did not spend any money on having a gymnasium built last year.
Logic:
(X or Y) == Not(X and Y) => (X is true, Not Y) or (Y is true, Not X): Correct Logic
(spent 60k on swimming pool) or (spent 55k in gymnasium) => (spent 60k on swimming pool), Not (spent 55k in gymnasium)
So statement is Logically correct

Please correct me if I am wrong.
Intern
Joined: 03 Jun 2005
Posts: 26
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Re: If X then Y, Help for CR [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2005, 15:38
HongHu wrote:
Since we have been working on some logical reasoning questions I'm going to try to collect the principles I'm following here for everybody's reference. Please feel free to discuss and add more.

If X then Y
This is the equivalent of: If non Y then non X.
Example: If it rains, then I will take an umbrella with me. I don't have a umbrella with me. That must mean it is not raining.

This is NOT equivalent to: If Y then X, or If Y then non X, or if non Y then X. In fact, if we know "If X then Y" and Y occurred, X may or may not happen.
Example. If it rains, then I will definitely take an umbrella with me. I have a umbrella with me today. Is it raining? It may or may not be raining. I said if it rains I will take an umbralla with me. But I could also take an umbralla with me just for the sake of it, even if it doesn't rain. By the same token, if it is not raining, do I have an umbralla with me? I may or may not have.

I didn't Understand this.
First, You said that 'if it rains, then I will take an umbrella with me.' The 'If/then' here is a condition that implies that you will take an umbrella "only" if it is raining. Does GMAT have such devious logic?
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 325 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2005, 21:27
Yes, GMAT tests this kind of logic all the time.

If x then y is NOT equivalent to Y only if X. In if x then y, x is the sufficient condition of y. In Y only if X, X is the necessary condition of Y.
_________________

Keep on asking, and it will be given you;
keep on seeking, and you will find;
keep on knocking, and it will be opened to you.

03 Jun 2005, 21:27

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 42 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
23 Recently, since rumors have been confirmed that the most 11 14 Nov 2012, 06:02
2 Since at least 1868, paleontologists have been arguing over 11 10 Jul 2011, 20:18
I have been trying CR questions based on logic i.e. A 4 08 Feb 2008, 09:41
7 Since 1945 there have been numerous international 9 26 Jan 2008, 08:54
Since 1945 there have been numerous international 11 23 Oct 2007, 01:47
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Since we have been working on some logical reasoning

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.