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. Occurs when an author makes conflicting statements. n






2. 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






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






4. 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






5. 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






6. A statement or judgement that follows from one or more reasons. Ask: What is the author driving at? What does the author want me to believe? What point follows from the others?






7. 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.






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






9. 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.






10. 1. Stem uses the word 'if' or another sufficient indicator 2. Stem uses the phrase 'allows the conclusion to be properly drawn' or 'enables the conclusion to be properly drawn'. 3. Stem does not lessen the degree of justification. Never uses 'most ju






11. 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






12. Read closely and know precisely what the author said. DO NOT GENERALIZE!.






13. Thus - therefore - hence - consequently - as a result - so - accordingly - clearly - must be that - shows that - conclude that - follows that - for this reason.






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






15. Percent - proportion - fraction - ratio - incidence - likelihood - probability - segment - share. n






16. 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






17. 1. An indication that the answer choices should be accepted as true 2. Keywords that indicate your task is to resolve the problem Action: Problem: Resolve Paradox Explain Contradiction Reconcile Discrepancy Conflict Puzzle *Attempt to prephrase Corre






18. 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






19. 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






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






21. 1. assuming a causal relationship on the basis of the sequence of events 2. assuming a causal relationship when only a correlation exists 3. failure to consider an alternate cause for the effect or an alternate cause for both the cause and the effect






22. 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.






23. 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






24. Occurs when an author improperly equates a percentage with a definate quantity or vice versa. n






25. 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






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






27. Stimulus (accepted) ----> Answer Choices (affected or determined) AKA: must be or prove family must be true - main point - point at issue - method of reasoning - flaw in the reasoning - parallel reasoning.






28. 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+.






29. 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






30. 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






31. Introduce something that actually contains an idea that is counter to the argument. By raising opposition - the author can minimize the damage that would be done by the objection if it were raised elsewhere. but yet - however - on the other hand - ad






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






33. 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






34. 1. ethical versus factual situations - when the stimulus addresses something ethical - a factual answer would be incorrect and vice versa 2. dual agreement or dual disagreement - often incorrect answer choices will supply statements that both speaker






35. Occurs when an author attempts to attack an opponent's position by ignoring the actual statements made by the opposing speaker and instead distorts and refashions the argument - making it weaker in the process. Often prephrased by 'what you're saying






36. Usually have one male and one female. The female uses sound reasoning and the male uses flawed reasoning or makes a mistake. This is not always true - but more often than not.n






37. 1. You must accept the stimulus info- even if it contains an error in reasoning-and use it to prove one of the answer choices must be true. 2. Any info in an answer choice that does not appear either directly in the stimulus or as a combination of it






38. 1. The survey uses a biased sample 2. The survey questions are improperly constructed 3. Respondents to the survey give inaccurate responses. People do not always tell the truth when responding to surveys.n






39. 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






40. Prephrase: after reading the question stem - take a moment to mentally formulate your answer to the question stem.






41. A fact - proposition or statement from which a conclusion is made. Ask: What reasons has the author used to persuade me? Why should I believe this argument? What evidence exists?






42. 1. Watch for answers starting with the phrase 'at least one' or 'at least some'. When an assumption answer choice starts with one of these phrases it is usually right. But ALWAYS verify with A.N.T. 2. Avoid answers that claim an idea was the most imp






43. Caused by because of responsible for reason for leads to induced by promoted by determined by produced by product of played a role in was a factor in is an effect of.






44. 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






45. 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






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






47. 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






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






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


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