Test your basic knowledge |

LSAT Logical Reasoning Clues

Instructions:
  • Answer 50 questions in 15 minutes.
  • If you are not ready to take this test, you can study here.
  • Match each statement with the correct term.
  • Don't refresh. All questions and answers are randomly picked and ordered every time you load a test.

This is a study tool. The 3 wrong answers for each question are randomly chosen from answers to other questions. So, you might find at times the answers obvious, but you will see it re-enforces your understanding as you take the test each time.
1. Thus - therefore - hence - consequently - as a result - so - accordingly - clearly - must be that - shows that - conclude that - follows that - for this reason.






2. 1. Any 'new' element in the conclusion will appear in the correct answer. 2. Elements that are common to the conclusion and at least one premise normally do not appear in the correct answer. 3. Elements that appear in the premises but not the conclus






3. The makers of the LSAT do not think that there are multiple causes for the same effect. When an LSAT speaker concludes that one occurance caused another - that speaker also assumes that the stated cause is the only possible cause of the effect and th






4. 1. Opposite answers. These answers do the exact opposite of What is needed. 2. Shell game answers. Occurs when an idea or concept is raised in the stimulus and then a very similar idea appears in the answer choices - but the idea is changed just enou






5. Always read each of the five answer choices. If an answer choice appears somewhat attractive - interesting or even confusing - keep it as a contender and move to the next answer.






6. Mistaken negation and reversal exp: taking the non-existence of something as evidence that a necessary precondition for that thing also did not exist' (MN) 'mistakes being sufficient to justify punishment for being required to justify it' (MR)n






7. Always ask: Do the given facts support the conclusion? Do the premises strongly suggest that the conclusion would be true? Does the conclusion feel like an inevitable result of the premises? Or Does the conclusion go beyond the scope of the info in t






8. Whenever you identify a causal relationship in the conclusion of an LSAT problem - immediately prepare to either weaken or strengthen the argument. Tasks for Weaken questions...must always identify a causal conclusion. Then ask if there relationship






9. Authors misuses info to such a degree that they fail to provide any info to support their conclusion or they provide info that is irrelevant to their conclusion. n






10. At least on of the two - possibly both.

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/html/basicversity.com/show_quiz.php on line 183


11. First Family The correct answer choice will be a rephrasing of the main conclusion of the argument. The conclusion is either in the middle or beginning of the stimulus. The correct answer choice must not only be true it also must summarize the author






12. To weaken a conditional conclusion - attack the necessary condition by showing that the necessary condition does not need to occur in order for the sufficient condition to occur. With a combo of a conditional reasoning stimulus and a weaken question






13. Refer to the amount or quantity in the relationship. Examples: (do not need to memorize) all - every - most - many - several - sole - only - not all - none - few.






14. Stimulus (affected or determined) ---> answer choices (accepted) AKA: Help Family assumption - justify the conclusion - strengthen/support - resolve the paradox.






15. The mistake involves assuming that conditions will remain constant over time - and that what was the case in the past will be the case in the future or present. n






16. They often feature 2 conclusions (main and sub.) - when the main conclusion is typically place in the first or second sentence and the last sentence contains the sub. conclusion. The sub. conclusion is set off by conclusion indicators while the main






17. 1. The info in the stimulus is supect. There are often reasoning errors present - and you will further weaken the argument in some way. 2. The answer choices are accepted as given - even if they include 'new' info. The task is to determine which answ






18. Argument Part - If you do see the main conclusion at the end of a Method-AP problem - be prepared to answer a question about a part of the arguement other than the conclusion.n






19. Assumes that only 2 courses of action are available when there may be others. n






20. Then - only - only if - must - required - unless - except - until - without.






21. 1. Stimulus will contain an argument. Must isolate and identify and assess the premises and the conclusion. 2. Focus on the conclusion. Almost all correct Weaken answers impact the conclusion. 3. The info in the stimulus is suspect. There are often r






22. 1. The sufficient condition does not make the necessary condition occur. That is - the sufficient condition does not actively cause the necessary condition to happen. 2. Temporally speaking - either condition can occur first - or the two conditions c






23. 1. Whatever term is modified by 'unless' - 'except' - 'until' or 'without' becomes the necessary condition 2. The remaining term is negated and becomes the sufficient condition.






24. Think about the structure of the argument before examining the answer choices. Do not expect to see the exact prephrase - there are too many variations. Make an abstract prephrase then examine each answer to see if it paraphrases the prephrase.n






25. 1. Increasing percentages automatically lead to increasing numbers. This is not necessarily true because the overall size of the group could get smaller. 2. Decreasing percentages automatically lead to decreasing numbers 3. Increasing numbers automat






26. Stimulus (affected or determined)--/-> answer choices (accepted) Negative sign on the arrow reflects attacking or hurting the argument (weaken).






27. Switches the elements in the sufficient and necessary conditions - creating a statement that does not have to be true. Given: A+ --> Study Mistaken Reversal: Study --> A+.






28. Because - since - for - for example - for the reason that - in that - given that - as indicated by - due to - owing to - this can be seen from - we know this by.






29. Take the statements under consideration and place them in an arrangement that forces once to be the conclusion and the other(s) to be the premise (s). Use premise and conclusion indicators to achieve this end. Once the pieces are arranged - determine






30. 1. Identify the conclusion - this is what you are trying to strengthen 2. Personalize the argument 3. Look for weaknesses in the argument 4. Arguments that contain analogies or use surveys rely upon the validity of those analogies and surveys. Answer






31. Mis-assessing the force of evidence is a frequent error committed by LSAT authors 1. Lack of evidence for a position is taken to prove that position is false 2. lack of evidence against a position is taken to prove that position is true 3. some evide






32. They can be in the premises or conclusion. If they are in the conclusion the argument is flawed. Classic mistaken cause and effect reasoning refers to occurences when a causal assertion is made in the conclusion or the conclusion presumes a causal re






33. An event or circumstance whose occurrence is required in order for a sufficient condition to occur.






34. 1. Incomplete info. The author fails to consider all of the possibilities or relies upon evidence that is incomplete. This flaw can be attacked by bringing up new possibilities or info. 2. Improper comparison. The author attempts to compare two or mo






35. As an argument progresses - the author must use each term in a constant - coherent fashion. using a term in different ways is inherently confusing and undermines the integrity of the argument. n






36. A. Eliminate any alternate causes for the stated effect. B. Show that when the cause occurs - the effect occurs. C. Show that when the cause does not occur - the effect does not occur. D. Eliminate the possility that the stated relationship is revers






37. Takes a small number of intstances and treats those instances as if they support a broad - sweeping conclusion. Often appears as an incorrect answer.n






38. 1. No conclusion. When a stimulus does not have a conclusion and contains a paradox - expect a Resolve question 2. Language of contradiction exp: but - however - yet - although - paradoxically - surprisingly.






39. Allows you to decide between contenders or to confirm that the answer you have chosen is correct. 1. Logically negate the answer choices under consideration. Usually consists of taking a 'not' out of a sentence or putting a 'not' in a sentence. 2. Th






40. If an answer choice describes an event that did not occur in the stimulus - then that answer is incorrect. Watch for answers that are partially true - that is answers that contain a description of something that happened in the argument but that also






41. Separate the answer choices into 'contenders' and 'loser'. After completing this process - review the contenders and decide which answer correct.






42. If the stimulus contains an argument - identify the conclusion. If the stimulus contains a fact set - examine each fact.






43. 1. new element answers - an answer that describes something that did not occure or describes an element new to the argument cannot be correct 2. Half right - half wrong answers - LSAT makers like to start off with something that happened - then end w






44. 1. The stimulus will almost always contain an argument you must identify - isolate and assess the premises and the conclusion of the argument 2. Focus on the conclusion. Almost all correct answer choices impact the conclusion 3. The info in the stimu






45. If the stimulus contains an argument - determine whether the argument is strong or weak.






46. Supporter - the traditional linking role - where an assumption connects pieces of the argument. (often new or rogue pieces) They also can close gaps. Ex: All male citizens of athens had the right to vote. Therefore - Socrates had the right to vote in






47. Used to introduce other premises that support the conclusion but are sometimes non-essential to the conclusion furthermore - moreover - besides - in addition - whats more - after all.

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/html/basicversity.com/show_quiz.php on line 183


48. To logically negate a conditional statement - negate the necessary condition. Example: neither...nor becomes either...or.






49. Quantity: All = 100 Not all = 0-99 Some = 1-100 None = 0 Time: Always - Not always - Sometimes - Never Space: Everywhere - Not everywhere - Somewhere - No where.






50. This type of flawed argument attacks the person (or source) instead of the argument they advance. because the LSAT is concerned solely with argument forms - a speaker can never validly attack the character or motives or a person; instead - a speaker