Ace the LSAT 2025 – Master the Law School Entry Test with Style!

Question: 1 / 575

Given "If harriers are in the forest, then grosbeaks are not," which relationship is accurately represented?

G implies no H or H implies no G (not both)

The correct relationship that is accurately represented is "G implies no H or H implies no G (not both)." This is because the given statement "If harriers are in the forest, then grosbeaks are not" shows a one-way relationship where the presence of harriers (H) in the forest implies the absence of grosbeaks (G), and vice versa. This relationship can be accurately described as one of implication, where the presence of one element leads to the absence of the other, but the absence of one element does not necessarily imply the presence of the other.

The other options are incorrect:

- In option B, the relationship is not bidirectional as it only goes one way.

- Option C is incorrect because it does not account for the relationship in both directions.

- Option D is incorrect because it suggests that both G implying no H and no G implying H are valid, when in reality only one of these implications is accurate.

Get further explanation with Examzify DeepDiveBeta

If G then no H and if no H then G

Only G implies no H

Either G implies no H or no G implies H, but not both

Next Question

Report this question

Download LSAT Practice Test PDF Study Guide
Subscribe

Get the latest from Examzify

You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our privacy policy