winterschool
Melinda can become a lawyer unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship.
Which one of the following statements cannot be validly drawn from the above statements?
(A) Melinda is lawyer. So she must have both done well on the LSAT and gotten a scholarship. Incorrect
it may be possible
(B) Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship. Correct
it cant be possible, if Melinda did well on the LSAT or gotten a scholarship than she can admit to lawyer
(C) Melinda did poorly on the LSAT. So she will not become a lawyer. Incorrect
possible, if any point in the argument happen than she will not become a lawyer
(D) If Melinda does not become a lawyer, then she did poorly on the LSAT or could not get a scholarship. Incorrect
possible
(E) If Melinda does poorly on the LSAT and does not get a scholarship, then she will not become a lawyer. Incorrect
possible
winterschool Melinda can become a lawyer
unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship
that means
Melinda can not become a lawyer if (she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship )
i.e
Melinda will become a lawyer if (she does
not poorly on the LSAT and
does get a scholarship )
So in this logic
Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship.
We can infer this .. isn't it ?
May you please revert on the above logic ...