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. 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






2. 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






3. 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.






4. 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






5. 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






6. 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






7. Occurs when an author makes conflicting statements. n






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






9. 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






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






11. 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






12. 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






13. 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






14. 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






15. 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






16. 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


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






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






19. Negates both conditions - creating a statement that does not have to be true. Given: A+ --> Study Mistaken Negation: Not A+ --> Not Study






20. 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






21. 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






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






24. 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






25. 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






26. 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






27. 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






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






30. 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






31. An event or circumstance whose occurrence indicates that a necessary condition must also occur.






32. 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






33. Involves judgements made about groups and parts of a group. an error or composition occurs when the author attributes a characteristic of part of the group to the group as a whole or to each member of the group Error of division - author attributes c






34. 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






35. 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






36. 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






37. 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






38. 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






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






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






41. 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






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






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. 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






45. 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






46. Premises + answer choice = conclusion When approaching answers - separate them into winners and losers - then apply the justify formula.






47. 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






48. 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






49. 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






50. 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