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. 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.






2. 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






3. 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






4. 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






5. 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?






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






7. 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






8. 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






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






10. 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






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






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






13. 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






14. 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+.






15. To raise a viewpoint at the beginning of the stimulus and then disagree with it immediately thereafter. The stimulus often begins with: Some people claim... Some people propose... Many people believe... Some argue that... Some critics claim... Some s






16. 1. You can use only the info in the stimulus to prove the correct answer choice 2. Any answer choice that describes an element or a situation that does not occur in the stimulus is incorrect Method of Reasoning questions use a variety of formats - bu






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






18. 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






19. 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






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






21. 1. The info in the stimulus is suspect. There are often reasoning errors present and depending on the question - you will help shore up the argument in some way. 2. The answer choices are accepted as given - even if they include 'new' info. Your task






22. The author assumes as true What is supposed to be proved. exp: 'this essay is the best because it is better than all the others'n






23. Immediately look for the repeat or contrapositive in the answer choices. Avoid mistaken reversals and mistaken negations.






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






25. Stimulus (accepted) --/-> answer choices (affected or determined) cannot be true.






26. 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.






27. 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?






28. A. Eliminates an alternate cause for the stated effect B. Shows that when the cause occurs - the effect occurs - assumption answers affirm the cause/effect relationship C. Show that when the cause does not occur - the effect doe not occur D. Eliminat






29. 1. Appeal to authority - uses the opinion of an authority in an attempt to persuade the reader. The flaw is that the authority may not have relevant knowledge or all of the info regarding the situation - to there may be a difference of opinion among






30. 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






31. 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.






32. Refer to the likelihood of occurence or the obligation present - as in 'The mayor should resign.' 'the law will never pass.' Examples: (do not need to memorize) must - will - always - not always - probably - likely - would - never - rarely - could -






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






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






35. Determine whether the stimulus contains an argument or if it is only a set of factual statements. MUST recognize whether a conclusion is present.






36. 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






37. If all 5 answer choices appear to be 'losers' - return to the stimulus and re-evaluate the argument.






38. 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






39. Amount - quantity - sum - total - count - tally.n






40. 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






41. 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.






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






43. 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






44. 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






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






46. 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


47. 1. The stem uses the word strengthen or a synonym (support - helps - most justifies) 2. The stem indicates that you should accept the answer choices are true.






48. 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






49. Weaken - attack - undermine - refute - argue against - call into question - cast doubt - challenge - damage - counter - When evaluating answers ask yourself: 'Would this answer choice make the author reconsider his position or force the author to res






50. 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