Test your basic knowledge |

LSAT Logical Reasoning Clues

  • 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. 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

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

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

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

5. 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

6. 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

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

8. 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

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

10. 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

11. 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+.

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

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

14. 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.

15. 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.

16. 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 -

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

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

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

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. 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.

24. 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

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

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

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

31. 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

32. 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

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

34. 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

35. 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.

36. 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

37. Occurs when the author uses an analogy that is two disimilar to the original situation to be applicable. n

38. 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.

39. 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

40. 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

41. 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

42. 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

43. 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

44. 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

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. 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

47. 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

48. 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

49. 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

50. 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