Existential Quantifiers | LSAT Logical Reasoning Basics

[@amneetdosanjh6558]

Hi this is an urgent question! At 12:22, you mention that the negation of 'none' can include 'some', 'most' and 'all'. Why can't it include many? Many is subjective, but it's still more than 'none' so would that not also be the negated form of 'none' ? Also, when tackling a question that requires you to negate 'none', would you negate none in all of its forms? How would that work?

[@jentallbot9227]

At 5:00 you said all implies most, most implies many, many implies some and that you can’t go up the ladder. But then at 8:39 you said some implies most ? Please elaborate

[@LSATAdapt]

Hi Jen! Definitely a confusing topic. At that point in the video (8:39) I'm actually trying to explain why you can't go from some to most to all on the ladder chain. This is mostly gonna show up in questions that deal heavily with structure like Parallel Flaw questions where the conclusion is based on some kind of overlap between groups. Just to clarify I thought I'd do a little breakdown of these: I have 'All' implying both 'Most' (51-100%) and Some (1-100%). That's because 'All' is encompassing. Most can imply Some, but not in reverse. When we say most, we mean that the amount is going to be at least 51% and at most 100%, and anywhere in between (I.e. 55, 73 etc). So Most will always fall in the range of Some (1-100%). The only thing that doesn't fall in the range of Some is 'none'. But going in reverse, Some cannot imply Most because we would have to make the assumption that whatever the amount Some is would be at least 51%. Which is not true. I hope this helps, and good luck with your studying, Alex

[@mmamer01]

@@LSATAdapt You said Most at 3:10 is 51% to 99% now your saying it is 51% to 100% - Plus doesn't most leave room for the some that isn't ??? Which is why we stop at 99% because some would be the remaining 1% if that.