Hey guys!
I have question regarding an overall DS Strategy.
So I have read multiple timesaver know, that the two given statements in a DS question cannot contradict each other.
Let’s say a DS Question asks us whether x > 0?
If statement (1) establishes that this is allways true (Sufficient), Statement (2) cannot establish that this statement is allways wrong. So statement (2) could only also prove that the question is allways correct, or be insufficient.
Meaning a DS question like this would never exist:
Is x > 0 ?
(1) x+1 > 1
(2) x - 1 < -1
Because the two statements contradict each other.
My Question now is the following.
If I can somehow say a statement (1) is allways TRUE, isn’t one scenario for statement (2) in which the question is FALSE sufficient to prove that the solution is A?
The logic behind it being that statement (2) will not prove that the question is allways FALSE, as this would then contradict statement (1).
Because we have established that Statement (1) is correct (B, C and E are out) and that statement (2) alone cannot be sufficient without contradicting statement (1) (D is out as well) the answer has to be A.
This seems a little to good to be true as it would greatly reduce the workload for the statement (2) in many cases.
Am I missing something?
I hope I could express what I mean.
Should this topic already be discussed some place else, sorry for the repost and thank you for posting the Link to that post
Thanks guys!
Posted from my mobile device