Logical Reasoning

What to do when they give you a "co-incidence" as evidence for a causal conclusion/assumption

Check for a competing explanation

Fasley equating characteristics: actual vs assumed oppisites

Christ is not tall soh emust be short Jh is not a republican so his must be a democrat Not being something does not mean you are the opposite of that thing Never use assumed oppsites on the lsat even/ especially when they are speaking about negation

Co-incidence vs correlation

Co-incidence= can be a once of occurnace whereas correlation means that when x occurs wy always occurs.

Parallel Reasoning structure questions: General Steps

Compare conlcusions, support and reasoning relationships

Stengthen/weakenquestions:confirmation

Confirm answer by fitting it in i between the supp and conclusion

Type of necessary assumption: Bridging

Connects the premise to the conclusion. If the assumption was not true then there would be no connection between the premise and the conclusion.

Negation vs contrapositive

Contrapositives= are the logical equivalent of a sttaement while negation is saying that the relationship does not excist Some x are y: negation no xs are y aka the relationship does not exst All xs are y negation some xs are not way"= you are negating the relationship here

Overvaluing a trait

Important does not mean that it is abslutly necesary

MBF ------ Disagree

In a disagree question, one person says X, another says not X. There's a contradiction. The statements come from two different people. In MBF questions, the statements come from one source. That's the only difference.

Most intersection

Intersection is that over half ofy A will have B quality

Wrong answer for main point questions

Is a dfferent role (premise/conect) Talk about a different subject (all info is in teh stim but the conclusoin is talking about a different part of the stim) Is just wrong

remember the different between evidence and the truth

Just becausee something is the first evidence of an occurrence doesn't mean it is the first time the occurrence has happened. evidence just means this is the first time we have seen it.

HARD/ weird pricniple questions with stems like Which of the following principles underlies the advice/reasoning?" a similar stem is "Which of the following principles most conforms to the reasoning?"

Just look for an answer that connects the premise to the conlcusion or deals with one of the assumptions. These questiosns with those kinds of stems often function like necessary assumption questions.

When the answer to a necessary assumption qustionis phrased in a negative way

Just make sure to ask yourself: what if this was not true

General note baout reading the stimulus

KEEP TRACK OF ALL PARTS OF THE STIMULUS. TEHRE MAYBE SOEMTHING THAT LOOKS LIKE CONTEXT TO YOU BUT IT COUL DBE A PART OF THE USPPORT THAT COULD BE STRENGTENED IN THE STRENEGTHEN QUESTION

Notes about correlation/causation weken questions

Remember, an answer choice wont weaken a correlation causation assumption if it only applies to part of the population disucssesed. For example, if the stm says heart disease correlated with malnutrition therfreo malnutration causes heart diseases, the right answer choice wont say that those who DISCOVER the have hd will eat less. It may seem to revirse tehcusation but it only applies to people who disover heart diseases and that could be one person. (so kind of lie the whole some issue).

In the exchange above, the function of Craig's comment is to

Method of reasoning question

Inference question wrong answes

Mis represents subject matter (they are taling about something different) Mis represents relationships: in the case of conditional statements this is like when they link them up incorrectly Jumps to a conlcusion : over generalises

One plus One= three isues:

Mostly has an issue withcontext which is a fails to consider issue where they fail to consider something in teh ocntext that could have led to the outcme that was being discussesd Most often though they will have thecommon reasoning problems that face the others Mainly think about it as an asusmptions issue.

Must be false questions

the right answer usually doesnt come from the most/some statements in the stim. it will come from the conditional statements.

Correct answer choice and assumptions

the right answr choice will not ask you makeany assumptions for it to be true

ambiguous term only incorrect if

the term is being used in 2 different t ways in the argument

Some/Most Valid argument Form 5: A--->B; A some C

then B some C

When you se the term "vulnerable to criticism" in the stem

then it is a flaw question

What to do when they ask for something the author takes for granted

then make sure ou dfind that flaw because often there wil be multiple flaws

when the conclusion of an argument says a not b

then make sure you focus on the not b bit

two factors are DIRECTLY PROPROTIONAL

then when one is higher the other is higher, when one is lower the other is lower

Flaw: things happening in teh past is not good evidence that something will happen in teh future

there is an inherent assumptino that nothing has changed

When to apply the "variance test"

when you are down to your contendors aka after you eliminate (like necessary assumption questions, strength// weaken questiosn.. overly specific questiosn likely to be incorrect)

Difference between MBT and MBF questions

where as the correct answer choice for MBT depends on no assumptions at all (they only depend on the premises stated in the passage), MSS questions depend on a tiny little assumption that's not stated in the passage. someitmes you cant see the aubtle assumtpion beeing backde and othere might not be. the answer to the MSS questions could be an MBT question.

sometimes the alternative cause for causal questions

will be given in the question stem. n that case, the way to strentgthen= will be to eliminate that alternative explanation.

Wrong Answers for inference questions

will generally be more extreme thanwe anticipate Be wary of picking an aswer which over generaizes and cannot be exactly/directlys supported

principle qeustions

will give you the conditional prbridget and teh anser choices will hve the premis/covnlcusion arguemnt which iwill havea a gaping hole that hcan be filled by the princip.e

some right answers for syrnegth. questions in correlation causation. questions

will not directly eliminate the alternate explanation. instead it will present details that willakr the alt explanation more difficukt

Prescriptive argument strengthen question

will prove that the reason prviided for why somethings shuldhappen is a good reason/ dress any challanges witht that reason will block or say that .a reason why the recomendation shoul dnotoccurd would not be the case.

Supporting Principle= sufficient assumption questions

Multiple conditioinal statements= our job is to see how or how they do not link up "If assumed then it is a conditional statement" Coform principle= the same as sufficient assumption issies

Definition of validity

Must be true

Two types of inference questions

Must be true : cand efinetly be proven Most strongly supported= can kind of be proven

Strengthen question:

Must strenfthen the point in a way that relates to the reasoning structure sti:

Group 4 logical indicators

NO, NONE, NOT BOTH, NEVER, CANNOT

Weaken questions

No matter what they say, from personal experience I have noticed that some answers have 2 which seem right. So pick the best one.. aaka in an answer challanging a study.. pick the one thatwould challange the validity of thestudy the most.

Principe Questions

No oneed to abstract the principle too much. sometime syou can finda an answer choice where the subject matter aka the actual conclusion, matches that stated in the stimulus.

Notatin fo most vs notation for some

Notation: More specific than some so you need arrows.

Look out for words like numerous in the answer choices for weaken questions

Numberous means some and indicates and answer that may be to gen.

likely on the lsat= functions just like most

On the lsat

Hypothesis strengthen questions

One way to strengthen is to eliminate alternative explanations.. remember this.

Invalid argument form 6 (most plus most issue)

R most B. most notL R most notL Most--> Most does not lead to another most intersection. It can lead to a some intersection

General note about conclusions

Remember that the conlcusion may not be the "author" or stimulus writers argument. It may just be somehing that they say "some propose" to do

Parallell Reasoning question note:

Remember that the order of the support does not matter

How t identify which terms are in your domain lookf for logical inidicators..

If there is a logical indicator before the term then it probably not a domain and will be one ofhe element in your conditional statemnt however, If the logical indicator follows a term than the termns before the logical indicator will be the domain remember , you sometimes have more than one logical indiviator so as long as they follow one it is fine). (i actually may need to check up on this when i review this material)

LSAT and opt out clauses

If they say . that x wil happen unlyess y happens ( scanned bookswill have errors unless people study them metculously) then wed dont know that people arent studying them meticulously... do not assume anything.

Principle questions

Reverse of sufficient assumption questions. aka : you get a conditional statement. n the stimlus and in the answer choices you get a premise or conclusion.

Basica Assumption Questins

What is the author taking for granted Answer: will express the flaw as an assumption

Iding flaws: some most analysis

What out for most issues aka know that most people do something never proves the point but knowing that most poeple do someonthing means that some poeple do do it.

When you are thinking about a flaw make sure to think about:

What they Fail to consider/takefor granted

Corellation= causation flaws

are inherently assuming that it wasnt a coincidence and that somethird fctor did not cause both the observed attributes.

Principles on the lsat

are just subsets of conditional statements

principle question a

are often similar to assumption questions

often

does not mean most

Sufficient Assumption tools with power statements then use the power formula split up method

draw each side of the power sentence conclusion on each side under your t.

Numbers and percentages step 1

first make sure that there is areal numbers and percentages issue in the rpoblem

Method of reaosning answer choices

make sure you know what arguments that do that thing look like.

causal relationship

not like conditional relationships aka direction doesn't matter if a cause b then not a then b would be expected when b exists then u expect to see a

always apart never together

notA <--> B; B<---> not A

when questions ask you support the conclusion

note down what the conclusion is and try to support it then

Numbers and perccentage issue 4: Ntote rising and falling

note if the prcentages are risig or falling

Point . at issue question.

sometimes you can just read both statements and figure out what the answer is from there.

Different between strengthen, psa and sa questions

strength of the required validity

right answers for sufficient assumption questions

strong and specific... look for answers that directly correspond to what is being said in the stimulous

obdurate

stubborn

Wrong answer choices for MBT questions

subjective terms like "highly" are rarely teh right answer for MBT questions.

not sound/fails to establish yuat

sufficient assumption

Variance test for evaluate the argument questions

supply two polar oppiste (extreme) answers to the questions posed and ten analyse how th evarying responses produce different effects on the conclsuion of the argument if different responses rpoduce difference effects on the conlcusion (one strengthens one weakns, thena the answer is correct) IF different responses produce the same/not different effect on teh conclsion= incorrect answer choice.

Causation strategy: when the support given is correlation (not covairance)

support given= repeated instances of x and b happening together check from: chronology (reversal b precides a) 3rd common cause: (introduce fro weaken and black for strengthen Data Set: A data set that competes or a data set that corrobating

survey results are not invalid just because they are smaller than the total.

survey of 100 is not unreliable just because the actual pop is 1 million. we can only say it is unreliable if there is an unrepresentative sample.

For very simle necesaary assumption where the argument is basica a therefore b

the necessary assumption wll often be the same as the sufficiant assumption aka a -->B

hard u derlying principle questions

the principle may not directly say if (evidence) then (conclusion). it will be something that strengthens the argument. if it is true the conclusion is true

for tough lr questions with very weak conclusions and where the support doesn't really seem to support the conclusion aka a circular reasoning questions (you should take into account a ducipli es blemished origins when assessing the scientific value of the discipline because you should consider chemistry's blemished origins)

the right answer may not be the. authr uses circular reasoning. it could be a fact that the author didn't consider. that would make it's conclusion untrue (fails to establish that that current practices could differ) aja fails to consider a reason why the conclusion wouldn't be try or why the blemished nature wouldn't matter.

Most arguments that have statistics

are causal arguments

Strong language for necessary assumpotioin questions

indicates wrong answer

numbers and percentages issues, the conclusioon

" there have been mor ehome burgluaries in springfield ths ear than ever before. Thus springfield residents are more likely tan ever . to be robbed at home. problem: equting moe (numbeR) with a percentage conclusuin... (now these residents are more likely than ever to be robbed. issueL has th e population of springfirle stayed the same? if the number of robberies increased btu the pp stayed the same then they are more likely.. if number of roberes increased but the population increased then the likelyhood increasing does not ean that they were more ikey to be robbed. assumptinon= that the population did not change.

Give and Example questions steps:

'Understand principle Find an answer that supports that principle Make sure you get the principle in a veryspecific way Alays focus on the elimination process the mmost forthese kinds of qustions MAKE SURE EACH PART OF THE ANSWER NATCHES UP TO THE EXAMPLE THAT HASBEEN PROVIDED Also make sure the modifiers are right "should ith shoud, mos with most"

inextricable

(adj.) - hopelessly confused or tangled

impugn

(v.) to call into question; to attack as false

exhort

(v.) to urge strongly, advise earnestly

the word propely means sufficient assumption

Aksi if it used the words i f assumed then it is likely to be a siffient assumption

Idea Bridging in sufficient assumption questions

. You have to build a conditional bridge from the premises to the conclusion.

What to do if they give you causation as an explanation

1. Check chronology aka see if there is a reversal that also works 2. Third common clause: introduce one to weaken or block it to strengthen the stimulus. 3. Data Set: check for competing or corroborating data sets (evidence showing that a happened when b didn't happen etc.) but I did like the power score eversion b

MSS questions

1. Subject matters he most.. eliminate answers that talk about items that we don't know about/ doe not fall under the purview oft is discussed 2. do not be scared if it isn't a must be true.. think about it like.. considering the evidence that is provided.. what can be true/ what is a conclusion that we can draw from this evidence.

3 eleemnts in number an dpercentaes isues

1. The total 2. The number within the total 3. percentage withinn the total if you get 2 out of the 3 you gave figure out the third 60- number 100- total means perentage is 60%

4 possibilities that arise from correlation

1. a causes b 2. b causes a 3. c causes a and b 4. no relationship

Sample answer choices for method of reasoning questions. Make sure you know what these things look like

1. appeals to analogy 2. Offers counterexample to a general principle 3. Appeals to popular opinion on the matter at issue 4. Distinguishes facts from value judgements 5. Draws an inference from a general principle and set of facts (all Jedi use the face, use is a Jedi, therefore Luke uses the force) 6. Provides an alternative explanation 7. Identifyingallplausible explanations for whys something is the case and disproving all of them (couldn't be all of these and therefore thesis the answer)

Most: Definition

50+1 Means 1/2 + 1 or more than 1/2 Most also does not exclude the possibility fo all so you no that it cant prove that there were a few who didnt do the action in quesion

biconditional: always together never apart

A <---> B; notB<----> not A

biconditional: if...but not otherwise

A <---> C

All plus some intersection

A <some> B; B-->C A <some> C

Common flaw structure for questions with comparative soluions

A can do something bc of X factor, therefore A is "better" than B at doing something. In this case they must assume that A is "better" at that X factor (metaphor more pervasive) than B. In other words, B is "not as good" at that X factor as A

IIn order for a pprescriptive argument or an argument where the author wants a specfific thing to happen to be valid there needs to be two types of evidence:

A reason why the thing should be done Proof that there is no big reason whythe thing should not be done. (kind of similar to the whole blocking thing) if its a flaw/ weaken/ strenghten question the right answer will often relate to the last peice of missing evidence.

Diagram for prinicple questions

A----> B (is what is given and the answers will either be A therefore B A (A---B) ----------- B or it could be not c therefore not a notB (A---B) The principle --------- not a A, or ot B are the only two options you could get.

Valid Argument Form 3 (the ctransitive aka chain them up)

A---> B B--->C so A---> C all people have teh capcity to love. If you have teh capacity to love you have compasion so all people have compassion

Valid Argument form 2: Denying the necessary or the contrapoistive of one

A---> B not B means that the item cannot b a If all boys play games, if tom doenst play games they are not a boy.

Valid Argument form 1: Affirming the sufficient

A---> B, then anyone who is part of the A group is also in the B group.. member of the sufficent set must be part of the necessary set. So for example all boys play games Tom is .a boy and therefore tom plays games.

biconditional: except

A-<--> not c goes to park every day except for the days when chris goes

Most definitions

A-most-> B All B are C; -B-> C A- most --> B-->C A -most..> C (you need to fill in teh gaps and add these items in where you dont see them) like if the question says most ds are ts and the info they give you is all fs are ts you need to fill in the gaps: Most ds are fs (need to review this)

Types of SA questions 1

About half the SA questions says something like here's my premise: "X" and here's my conclusion: "Y." You have to supply the missing premise: "If X, then Y." aka only dogs are blue; therefore tom is blue; A: tom is a dog A ---------- B (answer= A---> B)

Wrong Answers for most strongly supported questions

Add details: Specfics matter.. Look at the details the details "add" added to the answe choices Add extremes: "only" , "higher" etc. Also be aware of answers that overgeneralise (look at the detials/ qmodfiers included in the stimulus) Will make larger assumptions than what is made in the stimulsus

All to most

All a--> Bs; most As are Cs THEN YOU HAVE AN INTERSECTIONS so at least one or some Bs are C Think about it in terms of arrows coming out of different things.. however, i . still need to check this up.

Falsely equates issues

All about how the uthpr falsely transfers information from one source to another. : jim got fit bworking out so anice must have gotten fit by working out as well. Remember sometimes there are two bits of support and the falsle equation happens during one part of the support not the other. You need to be wary and look inside each of support for the flaw not just in the overall "premise to conlcusion relationship"

All-->most--> some

All dogs are cute--> most dogs are cute---> some dogs are cute

False equating relatinships:

Also can be represented as conditional logic issues Relationship in the support is considered to be equal to the relationship in the conclusion

Make sure you PROCESS ALL PARTS OF THE STIMULUS EVEN THE CONTEXT. BECUASE YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT WILL NOT BE USEFUL.

Also look for clues to make sure the context is the context, tehre may be some cases where the context isnt the context but you d o not know

RRE questions and other hard questions

Always pay attention to what they are specifically stating in the question stem aka "resolve the appartent discrepency between the scietnts belifs and the scietst results".

Causation strategy: Step 2

Always tell if they gave you a correlation r a coincidence to support their causation. correlation: repeated covariance coincidence: one specficic case /few instance of things happening together. ( like the lichen game)

Principle question answers. The stimulus will say if A then b so A--B

Answer choices will be framed as A therefore B

Strengthen/Weaken questions

Answers with some/many= likely to be wrong.. answer about "other" towns/ "other" entities not likely to be wrong especially if it sis a correlation causation one way to strengthen causation is to show that without the cause the effect didn't happen one way to weaken causation is to show the effect happened without the cause.

Must be true test for necessary assumption questions.

Approach all necessary assumptions as must be true questions aka considering what we have in the stimulus what must be true.

IF they are equating two things that seem kind of reasonable to equate like political utility in authoriarian regimes with greater acceptance of authoirtarian repression then you may just have to let them do that if you see a greater flaw. With comparative conclusions the flaw will just be in the comparative bit.

Arguments can be okay without being valid on the LSAT we can't arbitrarily slap this "just bc...is the case, doesn't necessarily mean the conclusion is true" method. (We can do this to 'all' LR Qs but not all of them warrant it) try to find the specfic flaw

General note about evaluating arguments (strengthen, weaken, which question should I ask) with comparisons

Arguments that rely on comparisons generally have answers that provide information about similarities/differences. : the question would dprovide info about the similarties/ differences. However, be careful that you're picking an answer with a relevant similarity or difference

Tpips for understandig the discrepency in explain the diescrepency questions

Ask "how come" or "why this even though this"

General Notes on iding a conclucsion.

Ask what is the author trying to pursuade me of Point to a random sentence and ask why should I belive it: For teh conlcusion you would site the info they gave you in support of that term

Arguments based on dichotomies

Assume that because notA it must be B aka the structure is not A therefore B kind of like overvaluing a trait issue s example: will not improve and therefore will sureley deteriroate remember about oppisites in tehe lsat... oppsite of low is not high but not low

Weaken Questions

Assume that the support/premises are true

A -> B A -most-> C

B some C

A most b, A most c

B some C

some/most valid argument form 7: A--->B; A--->C

B some C Remember, in some cases you can take the contrapositive to make sure the arrow and teh two elements are comig out of teh write side so that this statement is true.

When answering principle questions

Be wary of answers that are too blunt or extreme.. aka make sure that some is matched with some etc.

Methods of testing validity

Buckets and Lists

Words that indicate wiithen the context ends and the argument begins.

But, although adnd however

A most C; A most D

C some D : there will be an intersection betwenen thee groups

OR

Can be inclusive (can have both), exclusive (either a or y) or and ( fast that x or y)

Note about strengthen questions:

Can be more general, can just prodcde another reason as to why the conclusion may be true even if it doe snot address the flaw that you disucssed But has to use the material in stiulus

Causation implies (aka if a causes b then)

Correlation: there is a correlation between a and b chronlogy : a precedes b suggests no competing cause: unlikely that something else causes b to weaken, you can challange any of these 3 to strengthen you can strengthen/ have an answer that discusses any of these 3

Most Strongly support questions and inferences:

Could be more like an inference question, where they ask you to figure out which statement in the answer choices would be most supported by the information given in the stimulus

Invalid argument form 5

D some A some M d--> M Some +some = no required intersection remember that

A -most-> B -most-> C

DOES NOT MEAN A MOST C

A some b, A most c

DOES NOT MEAN. b some c

Method of reasoning

Descriptive. The answers are the map to all logic reasoning questions. Uses a lot of referential phrasing.

Weaken Arguments

Draw out arrows when possibile.. see what they are saying leads to what and assess that.

suffienct not equal to necessary issues

Equates one way to do someting with ebeing the only way to do it.. Also can be written as conditional logic Mainy fails to consider issues.. Doesnt thing of all the othr ways that the phenomenon could happen besides that one way

sometimes for observation explanation questions the observationexplanation pattern may be hard to tell.

Example question: Studies have shown that specialit y sports food have the same nutreients in te same quantityies as common foods fomgorcery store but they are more expensie. Therefore athletes must by them cause of ad campiagns. The unstated question that underlies this stim is why to atheletes still buy this stuff. That is the premise this stim is tryingto tackle. Ob= they cost more and not more nutrientious explanton: still buy them because of ad campaigns.

When the premise includes soemoe elses argument or a defending point tat the authro of teh conlcusion does not belive, thatis premise not the authors premise unless the author then goes to directly contract that particular point.

Example: biography omits certian points author claims this was ok for this reason Conclusion: but. it is not okay The argument is biography omits certain points---> it is not okay

Except in logic

Except is another word that indicates bi conditionals. Aka alan goes to teh park all days except for the days in which chris goes to the park= a--> not c and not c--> a (cause he goes on all other days.

Required Assumption Questions: steps

Find Gap: ? Find something that must be true for gap to be filled :? Im not sure if that isthe case remember= even ifompletly fix the argument it may not be NEEDED. That is what we are looking for Confirm with the negation test May not fix the argument andmay not be important But soemthing that if it was not the case the argument would flal appart You cannot exactly predct for these things

Steps to deal with logical indicators

Find logical indicator Find domain Find to ideas Translate using whichever translation rules you want to apply

Process for predicting inferences in must be false quetsiosn

Find teh inference made in the stimulus and then negate it

Always think in terms of "even though the premise is true", the conclusion will not be supported etc.

For strengthen weaken questions especially teh correct aswer will not challange the truthfullness of teh conclusion or premise

Definition of assumption

Forgotton premise

Conclusion questions:

HEY WILL ASK YOU FOR A PARAPHRASE!so it may not be exact and the conlcusion may include some stuff from teh support

Embedded clause

Has a subject, verb and a preducate, is often in commas

Like some,, more is also a useless answer for most strengthen/weaken questions

How much more? 1%, 80%?

KEY NOTE/inference about MSS questions

However, unlike MP questions, sometimes only a small portion of the stimulus is used to support the right answer choice aka its a conclusion you can draw but may not be the main conclusion of the whole thing. the answer may only e based off of like a single statement.

Absence of evidence flaw: pattern 2

I have proven your evidence wrong therefore your conclusion must be wrong

for parallel reasoning questions. Try to figure out what the conditionality is/ if there is conditionality in the stimulus aka whether the stimulus is a conditional statement.

IF the stimulus is not a conditional statement then come up with your own form for the questions.

How to bridge the gap between premise conlcusion in SA, PSA and strengthe questions

IF the terms identfied in teh premise happen then the conclusion will happen.

Step by Step approach to solving logical reasoning questions

Id Questionstem Read the Stimulus Ask: Is it an argument? Yes: Id the conlcusion premises and context Evauate teh argument for any assumptions made No Peice together teh info Anticipate teh answer choices Scan and eliminate

More Plausible

If an argument structure answer says that the author says this answer is more plausible then it actually has Mohave said this is MORE plausible.

The rgiht answe for .a flaw question wont accept the conlcusion true

If the conclusion says crying causes stress the right answer wont say that the author over looks the possibility that if crying causes stress then...

Sample MBT question stems

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must be true? Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above? Which one of the following statements follows logically from the statements above?

Pseudo Sufficient Assumption

Kind of suffienct assumption question but it will not completly justify the conclusion.

Inference Questions:

Look at how the stimulus relates to the answer choices

Principle Qeustions: the underlying principle in a passage

Look for a 1:1 match with the principle and sititaion aka should match the situation and it shoudl also match the undeerlying principle.

Explain discepency questiosn step:

Look for a point of overlap

Steps to deal with comparative statements

Look for than Look for the two things being compared wit each other See what thing they are being compared on Identfy a winner

For necessary assumption questions with bridging answers

Look for the choice that is the most widespread and laess in strength (some do this... this can generally result in this action). Specific choices like anyone who does this will have theis are often incorrect because they do not need to be necessary. you want the weak answer.

Remember when you suspect something is a causation/correlation issue

Look for the cuasation correlation flaw. it may be hidden in the stimulus in a line that you may not be paying enough attention too but you should!

For identify the role questions

Make sure answer reps what is said in the stimulus Make sure that the answer is not nacurate and ttalking about a different part of the role

For questions that are like " argument can be interpreted to invoke which of the following principles" after they give you like a stimulations or a situation

Make sure not to pick the answer which is too strong/ generalized. For example, if they gave you a situation where they were like in this situation and something may happen then the answer= probably no the ones that has the word inevitably in it.

Things to keep in mind for necesary assumptionn questions and others

Make sure that you understand/ pay attention to wordslike preserve. Preserve is nt equal to expand on the lsat.

Point at issue question

Make sure you go through the answers one at at a time. for each person. So read the first persons point of view, go through teh questions and tehn repeatthe process with the second persons point of view.

Paralell Reasoning structure questions note

Make sure you understand teh specifics of teh conclusion

Some mst Valid Argument form 1

Many= some; A many y then a some y

Picking nswes for for inference questions

PICK te safest answer of the one that requiresthe smallest leap (kind of like required assumption questions )

Remember, sometimes you have to pick the answer that strenthens the most. The answer which rules out common alter explanations eg. b causes a., will usually be right.

Saemwith causation flaw questions.. usually the answer choicee which says "They mistake a causation for correlation" will be correct.

Causal Logic can also be described as

Scientific logic so the idea that phenomenon leads to the hypothesis.

Easiest way to eleiminate answer hoices fo point at issue/ questions

See if either side doesnt have an opnion on the issue that the answer choice is discussing.

Words that indicate that the support or conclusion is in the sentence (either in the front or behind)

Since or because

"pushing topics into the domain" when translating cnditiona l statements

So when you are identifying which items go into your conditional statements and hich parts of teh stimulus to ignore when translating into lawgic, realise which items can be part of your domain ( maybe notatethem) It is all about seeing what context each of the terms in you conditional statements are in.

Negation= contradiction not opposites

So when you negate soemthing it is just (not the othe thing). There are only two worlds A has risen or a has not risen When they say not risen they do not mean fallen and negating risen does not lead to fallen

Few definition

Some are, most are not Few dogs are eveil: D some E Most D ---> not evil: MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THIS AND KNOW THIS!

Some/Most intersections: Some

Some could mean all basically anything above zero so some doesnt mean that there are any which dont do the thing you are taling about= could be all 1-100 is the range Means at least 1 (that is how we translate it!)

Most strongly supported Questions and conclusions

Sometimes the answer for these questions coul dbe the conclusion. (it wont be included in the stim and the questioncould aask you to find teh conclusin in the answer choices)

Argument Part Questions

Sometimes, what you'll be asked to label won't even be a part of your argument, as in situations where a sentence from the context or someone else's argument is selected

Match the flaw questions: steps

Start off comparing the onclusions: take a quesick note of what the basic structure of the conlcusion. Steps: Different Conclusion: Is it a trend?, counterexample, pointing ot teh existance of an superiro alternative explanatoion? Look for negation and qualifiers (some going to most, positive vs negative ones etc.) Sometimes the support/ conclision will use an either or relationship. When confirming teh right answer make sure all those compenents are the same for both

Sufficient assumption question. General Diagram

Stimulus P (blank) ----------- C Answer choice P---->C (thats what you have to figure out)

Principle Questions

Stimulus P-----C Answer choice P ----------- C (thats what you have to identify)

Inference question: The general diagram

Stimulus: P P---> C Answer choice --------- C (thats what we have to figure out aka what the C is)

Average (Definition)

Sum of all of the members of the list divided b y the number of items in the list. So it doesnt matter how many maembers for this. They account for that.

Sometimes the answers for disagree questions will not be explict

The thing the disagree on may be an implicit assumption held by someone on the other side.

Wrong answers for most strongly supported questions: Subject Matter

Talk about a subject atter taht is related to but NOT THE SAME as what is mentioned in the stimulus Example: the stimulus talks about what happenswhen you take a does larger than half a gram about something and the sanswer choice talksa bout what happens when you take a does smaller than half a gram. Trap answers: Use very minutely different subject matter that may be only alittle bit more general than the subject matter discussed in the support, aka the stimulus talks baout commerical airlins and the answer choice talks about "people who flew"

When the statement in the stim for a mss question includes a prescriptive statement

The answer choice could include a prescriptive statement. ex.: it could say that phys ed teachers should do this but because of this factor they are not able to achecive their goal therefore they should not do that factor

PSA assumption question vs sufficient assumption question

The answer for psuedo sufficiaent wont necessarily make teh argument valid. It may just correct the flaw. or expose/address the assumption that is being made.

Explain the discrepancy questions with 2 groups/ a comparison (like one control group and one not)

The answer has to explain why there isn't the expected different between the groups.. not just want the expected result didnthappen to one of them

Common answer choice for explain the discrepency questions with expalnin the surprising experienet/surevey results (we antcitipted some change in thsis period but the surves dont seem to show that it happened)

The anticipated change cam e and was resolved by the time the second survey was taken.

For questions that assume that there is a correlation and there fore a link aka tha dont use strong words like EVERYTIME THIS HAPPENED THIS MUST HAPPEN

The argument still stands if there is one case where the logic did not go throug like one case where the logic did not go through or where a happened and b did not follow.

Main point questions

The conclusion will be paraphrased so it may take into account parto fthe support and be more general than the conclusion appears in teh passadge (may be more like they are asking for the authors purpose.

Sample SA question stems

The critic's conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed? Which one of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion of the therapist's argument to be properly inferred? The argument's conclusion is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed? The conclusion above follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

Necessary not sufficient flaws and sufficent not equal to necessary flaws

The flaw willl always appear/ can be wrten down in logical format for example. The support with say x-->y while the conclusion syays y(thenecessary condition) is now the sufficient conditionand y--> x.

Most + most intersection

The inference is that some do both

Inference Questions

The main issue you have to worry about with these questions= reading comp. Before you move on to the answers make sure you compeltly understand what the question iss asking of you.

Type of SA questions 2

The other type of SA questions has conditional or intersection statements already in the premises or conclusion. The stimulus might say something like "A → B" therefore, "A → C." You're being asked to supply the missing premise "B → C." A----> B --------- X-----B Answer: X----A)

You can think of these causal questions as phenomenon that needs an explanation. Aka the phonon is the effect and the cause is the explanation/hypthesis.

The phonon could also be the correlation/ co-incidence

For weaken questions

The right answer will "deprive the support" aka it will prevent he premise (support) from being able to support/prove the conclusion. even if both statements are true.

Numbers and percentage issue: step 3: Id the missing eelement

The rights answer will often revolve around what is nt being said so if the give you a number and total the missing element is teh percentage then the solution will be often about the percentage.

When you are trying to rpove a conclusion wrong and the conlcusion is an if then statement

Then 1. Connect the known statements ifrm the support to the conclusion to get a full picture of what the conclusion is trying to say 2. pick an aswer that would directly contradict the conclusion.

Paralell Reasoning Questions Step 2

Then look at the relationship between teh support and conclusion. Howeacty does the support work to justify the ocnclusion.

When the point of disagreeement refers to a particulr cnlcusion made by theother party. Aka, I disagree with one specific point that you said.

Then make sure the answer choice that you choose is actually a conclusino reached by the person. Be wary of making any jumps. pick the answer that relates most to a conlcusion that was reached. be wary of answers that are toospecific.... If wht they disagreee with is general then pick the one that is more general even if they are also likley to disagree with the more specific choice.

When you are trying to strengthen an argument, expecially a observation, explanation question or an explaination that is trying to establish causation (emotion makes people sing differently etc.)

Then the answer hat establishes a correlation may not always be corrct look out for answers that do not strengthen the argument because if they werent true the argument would not be affected (like negation test) paents displayed emotion when no child or adult present doesnt mean that the reason they dang differently isnt because they had emotion Lastly.. between 2 answers hat seem right the one that conforms tothe standard strengthen aswes for observation explanation= will be corrret. (aka eliminating alt. explanations... strengthen the chances of this one being correct)

A -> B A some C

Then- B some C

Contrapositives for some

There are none

Explain a discrepency Question

There is a discrepency between two items and our job is to explain it note: Often teh discrepency wont have anything to do with teh main point

My main problem is not reading

Therefore, spend a lot oft time: Id conclusion Id support Id flaw

Terms that show you conlcusion is coming up

Therefore, thus, etc.

Every time I have a tough "responds to the argument by" question write out

They are challenging/disagreeing that x by doing y always ask. aARE THEY ATUALLY CHALLANGING THE PREMISE OR SAYING THE PREMISE ISNT ENOUGH

Always remember to distinguish between reliability and accuracy

They are different terms

With correlation: there could be a third factor that explains both phenomenon.

This explanation is most commonfor these questions.

Transfering most example: saying tat most law school sunders are under the age of 30 does not mean that most people under the age of 30 are law schoo students

Thisis becayse the group of law schools tsudents ismuch smaller than the group of people under the age of 30. The LSAT might describe this flaw as failing to recognize the relative size of different groups.

Overvalues opnion issues:

Truth is never he truth because someone said so Similarly, the truth is never not the truth because someone didnt say so or because they said something diffierent

Must Be True Questions

USe formal logic (aka they contain conditional or intersection statement). Should be like math problems to you standard f proof is higher for these than for MSS questions. Aka the answer must be valid

Role of statment question steps

Underline the phrase that you are being asked about Id the Conclusion determine how the phrase relates tothe conlcusion

Reasoning Structure questions:

Understand task Find mp Find support Elimindate wrong answers

Wrong answers for logical reasoning questions

Unrelated to sim Unrelated to conclusion/support Unrelated to the reasonining/ the argument Doesnt complete the task required by the question Could also view them as talks about subjects that are not mentioned in the stim, misrepresents info in the stim and doesnt solve the task at hand

Wrong anslwers to flaw questions

Unrelated to stim Misrepresents the support Misrepresents the conclsuon Unrelated to the reasoing/ argument/ mis represents the relationship between the premise and support (not the gap) Unrelated/misreps the flaw

Wrong answers for conclusion questions

Unrelated to stim Will talk about some other part of the agrument Will over extrapolate, ver generralise etc.

Explain a discrepency question wrong answers

Unrelated/misrepresents to stim Disucssed by one not the other Not a point of disagreemenet Avoid answers that ask you to make generalisations.. Aka pick the answer that is closest to the topic that we are discussing

Bridging in necessary assumptions

Usually occur when the answer choice in question is conflating two ideas.

Argument Part Questions

Usually, the part of the argument the question stem selects will not be the main conclusion of the argument

all necessary assumptions are entailed in valid arguments and the contrapositve means that if tone necessary assumption is not fulfilled by the agrument then it is not a valid argumen

V--> NA not NA--> not valid.

peice not equal to puzzle

WATCH OUT FOR GENERALIZATIONS

When doing paralell flaw questions with the false dichotomy issue

Watch out for how many doors there are.. aka if the author is just over one possible or the middle option (aka it must not rise there for it willl fall.. in this case overlooking the middle option) then the right answer will also ignore the middle option. it wont be one where the author ignores more than one option (doesnt choose cheese and therefore must choose peperoni for example)

Good ol' Strengthen questions with Correlation/Causation flaws! Stimulus Breakdown: Purported cause: Sleepiness from waking up too early Effect: A decline in car accidents Additional info: Granville pushed back their school start time and saw a decrease in accidents.

We should look for an answer that: 1) Eliminates an alternative cause (Granville also hired more cops) 2) Shows the cause and effect going together (another town pushed the school start time back and saw a decline in accidents) 3) Shows that in places without the cause, there wasn't an effect (other towns didn't change their start time and didn't see a decline in accidents)

Weakening questions where the argument conc= one of many options.

When an argument's conclusion is just one of several potential explanations, the correct answer will probably deal with alternative explanations. However, it won't always do so directly.

Causation strategy: when the support given a co-incidence

When the support is a coincidence aka they are saying that x happens with y once therefore x causes y (talking about one specific case) Solve by checking for compeiting explanations

Whe do you get a flaw

When you hae a few equally possible possibilities andyou pick one for no reason.

Arguments by analogy

When you see these kinds of questions, the way to go is just to disprove the nalygy.. Sy that the analogy is not legitimate because, you missed out on something, etc. Show that the anlaogous argument is not that analogous

Causation strategy : 1

Whenever there is causation in the conlcusion or in an assumption: this is ALWAYSwrng aka it is always an error.

Some notation

Write it out: some dogs are cute: D some C and it can go the other way C some D

Use of only in logic

Y are the only Xs= x--> Y The only X are Y= X-->Y but both have the same meaning

When an argument is saying that something will be "cooler" or something er aka different if a particular phenonon occurs aka greater area covered with snow and ice, the cooler on average the atmosphere is likely to become

You dont just need to prive that snow and ice can cool... but that without the snow and ice it would be warmer than it would be with these factors. You need to prove that the "something", cooling etc will happen to a lesser degree if the phenonon doesnt aoccur just because x can do y doesnt mean x does y better than all other options need notx then noty

When the argument has a recomendtaion conclusion aka when it says something "should be done"

You need to have both a good reason why it should be doe no overriding reason why something should not be done. Any answer choice that challenges the reason why something should be done or provides an overriding reason why something should not be done will weaken the argument.

Rule for translated group 4 logical indicators

You pick either idea, then negate that idea, then make that idea the necessary condition.

for stimuluses that have experiments that do the post how ergo propter hoc thing aka this happened after x so x caused it... it will strengthen the stim to have

a control group aka a group where x didn't occur and therefore y didn't occur

partial cause

a not b and not a but still be won't weaken the best way to weaken partial cause- alternate explanation and say a doesn't lead to b or challenging the data

Percentage definition

a part of a whole expressed in hundredths

invalid argument form 7

a some b a some c b some c REMEBER THIS WORKS FOR MOST RELATIONSHIPS

Invalid Argument form 1: Any thing that is not (must be true) is invalid

a--> b therefore b---a : this is an invlaid argument form

Biconditional: either z or y but not both)

a-<--> not b DIF FROM JUST NOT BOTH WHICH IS REPRESENTED AS A---> not b

post hoc ergo propter hoc

after this, therefore because of this

When answer explain the discrepency questions: make sure taht you are v clear about what the discrepency is

aka if they are saying theere was a n icnrease thenwhat time frame did the increase happen becuase teh correct answer woul dhave to explain why there was an increase in that period.

for discrepency questions tdo not be too strengent with ohow you predict answers

aka just id what the discrpency is and be open to answers that will help you resolveit

Whenever an argument deals with a comparison, and you're in a strengthen/weaken question, leave any answer choice that compares/contrasts the elements of the comparison in play during your first pass.

aka keep the ones tthat discuss similarities/ diffferences.

Weaken Questions

ake sure that the answer doesnt just prove that the ocnlcusion is wrong or hurt the conlcusion but specifically hrts how the support is working to justify the conlucison.

weaken obs. explanation

alt RX not b and a not a then b data not good think of it like different signs

How to weaken an observation explantaion argument

alternative expantion for the observationbeyond what was explained. or counter example aka the observation occured without the explantion.

principle questions

always get rid of the backwards answer.. the one that does the opposite of the conditional state x--->y vs y-->x

phenonon hypthesis questoins (strengthening/weakening)

always try to block the compeiting hypothesis

Some questions appear to be strengthen/weaaken questions but th difference is that instead of having a specific flaw like the one stated by the trainer they may juts have no support

and your job o strengthen/compelte the answer is to find teh support (just as with some "follows logically" questions you ob is to find teh conlcuison)

"Cites as parallel" , "citing as similar"

another term for argument by analogy.

for strengthen/weaken questions

answer choices that appeal to authority or analogous examples (this happens in other cities) are rarely correct.

for tough which question would help us evaluate the argument question

answer the question and see how much info it would give you

to Id if something is an observation explanation question

ask what caused the observation that is not made ob- the effect explanation- the cause

Necessary assumption questions

ask you to connect the dots betweent he supprort and the conclusion.

What is the incorrect assumption for circular reasoning questions

assumies that it is correct. aka just assumes that the conclusion is correct.

A lot

at least one

Fr logically completes questions

avpd answers that are extreme and out of scope pick the answer that is with scope and would be something that relatestothe premises but you could reasonabley be expected to conclude from the premises.

alternate explanations for correlation questions

b cause a c cause a and b no relation aka coincidence

wrong answers for principle questions

backwards (pursue the conclusion on the sufficient side), too general, mis repa info in the stim

principle questions-

be very specific about what the different components are

flaw- transferrong characteristics of the average onto the extremes

because the average weight not increase proportion of obese people - not increase

abnormally is a corrrlayion

because u ate comparing againsy the average

OBSERVAtion explanation argument

begin with an observation and then they give an expalnation.

credence

belief, mental acceptance

Prescribing Intentionality

big theme on the lsat

Possibilities when it comes to correlation aka what are the alternatives when they try to teak us that causation leads to correlation.

c causes a a causes b b causes a no relationship

All logical flaws

can be expressed as necessary assumptions

post hoc ergo propeyrt hoc

can be strengthened by a control group.. not a then not b

contradictory on the lsat

cannot simultaneously be true

belie

contradict; give a false impression

circular reasoning is often a trap for converse flaws

converse flaw- mistaking sufficient for neecessary

Causation implies

correlation, no competing clause, chronology

corelation/causation nd prediction

correlation= also has to compoare to the population on average

Corellation vs statistic

correlation= requires a rate and a cmpairosn. statisc is a number of percentage that standars alone.

Weaken Questions

counterexamples are often correct for this.

Invalid Argument Form 3: (some issue

d--> c some L d---> L no (there could be some cs which are not ds and these could be the ones which are l)

arguments by analogy

depend on how close the analogy is to the item or thing that is being discussed. Mre similar then it is stronger and vice versa

Argument structure questions

describe how the argument gets to its conclusion so write down the evidence and conclusion and describe how they are getting there

Numbers and percentages issue step 2

determine if the number orposition being discussed is the total or a portion of a given totalk

remember some observation explanation questions could go in opposite order

diet high in fact becuase he was hisgnosed with cholestoral. The observation is that he was diagnosed with cholestorl. te explaination is diet high in fat.

principle applied questions

directions conditionality matters

terms like "must be consistent with"

do not imply conditional logic.. keep in mind the strength orf these terms. Saying x is consistent with y does =nt mean x--->y or y--->x.. t just mean that the 2 are not contradictory.

Role of statment questions

do not predct the answer= this is difficult to do

common ways to strengthen causation orrelatoon. questions

eliminate alt example b didn't cause a, c didn't cause a and b and there was a relationship a then b not a not b

For tough MSS questions

eliminate based on subject matter first. Do we know anything about ALL celestial objects for example

for principle questions

eliminate incorrect answers right off the bat

Some. most valid argument forms

emember that when you awant to chain thins aup and make and einfer x-most->B--> C the key thing to remember is that you can'tchain up wif the some/most in tin the first bit aka it doesnt work to say X most> B so X most -C

Tyeps of flaw: appeal to emotion

emotionalls are logically irrelavant to this questio

Correlation

empirically observed covariance or changes that happen together out in the word

correlation

empirically observed covarience: out in the world these changes happen together

Anther way to strentthen a correlation leads to caustaion argument

establish the chronology akashow that the cause happened before the effect (this eliminates an alternative explantaion)

Formula for arguments on the LSAT

ev+ assumption= conclusion

sufficent assumptions

ev---> conclusion

Sometimes the answers for principle questions will be prescriptive

even if there is no prescriptive lang in the stem (aka it just shows a positive result) pick the answer that explains whites happening in the stimulations the best

Always elimnate inverse/converse answers that you know are obviously wrong

even if youare not sure what the right answer is

the term most on th lsat= must remain with the term it modfies

ex. most ouppies are cute does not mean most cute things are puppies

remember fir principle questions... the specific terms in the conditional statement matter a lot

example INTENDED TO BENEFIT vs jsyt benefit. even if it didn't benefit but was intended to it would still be good in this case

Negating (not contrapositive) if statements involves adding in some chance of possibility that wasn't there before

example If the record sells well, then you will be famous. negation: the record could sell well and. you could still not be famous.

Some= in a can relationship

example some ppiolets are blind means that you can be a piolet and be blind

The except condition can be written as an and in the conditional statement

example: 1st time author gets no attention except when they are a sceleberty means 1st + not Celberity---> no attention.

look for differences in the strength of the argument

example: only vs sometimes

How to weaken obsevation explanation arguments

find an alternative explanation, (c--> B) show the cuase without the effect a happened but b did not happen show the effect without the cause b happened when a didnt establihs that the expalantion does work.. soome reason why a would be unable to cause b.

for strengthen questions with a correlation causal relationship

find the answer that supports the causal relationship maybe by giving the contrapositive

Remember for principle questions it may not exactly follow the formaula given by 7 sage and may be he same as a sufficient assumption questions

find the premises and conclusions and then identify an if---> then statement that will fill in the gap. If(premise) then conlcuiosn.

strenegthening/weakening arguments that jump from stat to causality/ conclusion

focus on the statt itself and show the elativity ofthe stat even if 80% of vegetairans dont have high bp.. if 90% fof people dont have highBP then being a vegetarian may seem to increase your chances of having a high bp.

Two step test for flaw questions

for each answer choice ask: 1. Is is descriptively accurate (does the argument do what the answer choice claims it does) 2. does it describe the flaw: is the assumption the answer choice describes teh actual flaw.

Always keep not eof qualifiers/modifiers in your conclusion especially ones that denote the strength f teh argument....

for example "purely" or "always"... in these cases you dont just need evidence that something can ccur but you also need evidence that other things cannot occur.

statistics need to have a comparison factor

for it to mean something is 80 prrrcr t s lot of littkd

Embedded conditionals

gb--> (y-->z)= gb and y--->z

another way to weaken correlation questions

give a counterexample that shows that a doesn't cause b or can't cause b ,,straight up

praxes

habit or custome

seldom and rare on the lsat

happens less than 50 percent of the time.

Resolve reconclile expalin questions

have the appeaence of contraditiction. carl is the best destrective but he on solves 10% of cases while others solve 80% of cases . (appearence of contradiction): is he the best tho? come up with a hothsis to explain teh phenomenon.

Biconditional indicators

if and/but only if either or/ not both but not otherwise except

Numbers, percentages and answer choices

if there is a conclusion present, often the conclusion is flawed and based on confusion between the number and percentage isea no coclusion aka its a fact set then you can ussually make the numbers ad percentages work together to figureoutt the right idea.

The subject matters for logical reasoning and especially observation and explanation questions.

if thestimulus offers something that could be a good alternative explanation for why something happens in ANOTHER CITY...bbut the stimulus is about THIS city then that statementw oud not be a good alternative explanation.

Keep track of what the author is saying in specfic questions and the strength of their conclusoion

if they are saying we found x so probably y... the assumption is x-->y aka everytime you have an x you have a y T weaken you would give another reason for why there might be an x that would weaken the suggested that everytime you had x you got a y aka x was . used for that purpose.. You could do his by suggesting another reason for why there might be x that was unelated to thsi spurpose. aka was there for heat and light not to smoke meat. The right answer wouldnt be that there were also notx.. that wouldnt damage the relationship that x led to y. It would just ndicate noty.

When you see a statistic in a stimulus

immediately ask yourself: is this a lot or a little?

inexorable

impossible to stop or prevent

MBT and SA quetsions

in MBT wyou are given all the premises nad you are looking for teh ocnclusion that will make the argument valid for SA questions you are looking for the premise that would make the argument valid. The conclusion is already given.

Wrong answers for MBT questions: prescriptive language

includes terms like should and shouldnt

Relationship between percentage and number

increasing or decreasing the number of something could casue the percentage to increase/ decrease unless thee is also a fluctuation in the total.

relationship between numbers and totals

increasing the size aka total of something could casue the number of somethingt o increase but will not cause the percentage to increase.

"neglect to mention" in method of reasoning stimuluses

indicates that someone is saying that the facts described by their adversary are meisleading.

One flaw on causal section of the lsat that comes up sometimes in causal questions

inferring "purpose from effect . or prescribing interntionality. x caused him o helped.. so x must hav e WANTED to INTENDED FOR Y TO BE HELPED. THEY ARE INGNORING ALT EXPLANATIONS HERE THAT X COULD HAVE CAUSed y for other reasonins

Nature vs nurture

is a big theme on the lsat. for strengthen/weaken questions if the stimulus says this behavior occurs because of nature.. the alternative explanation= it happens because of nurture.

some others

is referential phrasing! pay attention to who this statement is speaking about.

Whenever you have an argument that relies on scientific experiments.

it is important to check if they controlled for a variety of factors.. In any scientific experiment, it's important to control for a variety of factors. Here, it's clear that there really was a difference between the two recordings. The question is: was it emotion, or something else? Was the observd difference because of the phenonon being studied or could it have been someone else. The right answer for a strengthen question in this situation would give us a reasn why it was that phenonon or eliminate other posibilitie.

necessry assumption and teh validity scale (strengthenig, psa and sa questions)

it is on teh lowest run when it comes to the validity issue aka it does not make the argument more valid instead it plays more of a defending role so it defends it against criticism. aka t just prevents you from dying.

the word abonormally indicates correlation

it makes it seem like. z cahs a more than normal tendency to do y SO IT IS A COMPAIRSON! rats are abnormally smelly = rats more likely to be smelly than other things.

Absence of evidence flaw: pattern 1

just because something cannot be disproved does not mean that is true or untrue ansece of evdience is not evidence of absnese.

comparison cannot be used to make a quantative statement.

just because something comes in second does not mean that a lot of people chose it.

Watch for "empty referents" in the answer choices of method of reasoning questions

like if the answer says the author challenges some proposal and there was no proposal discussesed in the stimuli. Then the rproposal would be an empty referent.

Many observation explanation questions gives evidence in the middle.

like the stim might go a--->B BECAUSE....

All to s Some

ll Bs are A; some Bs are d and therefore some A s anre d (/because B and A are basicall equal in this case)

one of my problems in required assumptions is that I almost pick the opposite answer aka the answer that would directly contradict the answer or would strengthen the argument IF NEGATED

look at griffon prep work 59 for example. (lesson 4). just keep this tendancy in mind!

Paralell Reasoning questions Step 1

look for differences in conlsuionn different kind of conclusion, you have some causal conclusions, conditional conculsions etc.

Wrong answers for MBT questions: evlauative langugage

look out for evaluative langufe like best.. this will usually not be the right answers

sufficient assumption

look out for inverse answers and keep track of your contraposotives

Wrong answers for MBT quetsions: unsuppoted comparisons

look out for unsupported comparisons in your answers

For Must be false questions

make an inference from the stim and then negatie it

"overlooks the possibility" questionon where the flaw is a correlation/causation issue

make sure the answers for these kinds of questions directly y relate to the conclusion. The conclusion says that because wight loss is correlated with diet then nany one on the diet will lose weight the possibility the y overlook isntt that some people cu=oudl lose weight without going on the diet.. that isn't a possibility they are overlooking. The possibility they are overlooking is that some people could have doene the diet and not not lost wight. just because correlation doesn't mean that everyone who does x has to do y.

MSS Questions

make sure the subject matter is correct between the stem an answer choices

if you have an explain the discrepancy wuesyion which involves comparing 2 items. like why are cars which extra saftey features more prone to accidents than cars without these features.

make sure to pick an answer which explains why one is MORE ACCIDENT PRONE THAN THE OTHER (key- than). not just an answer showing why cars with saftey. features could be accident prone.

explain the discrency questions

make sure you know exactly what the discrepency is before you proceed.

IN ALL LR GAMES READ CLOSELY

may attention to specific details about who the subject is, modifiers to conditions in the evidence, etc.

strengthen questions

may someontimes give an indepdent reason for why a particular answer may be correct.

usually and likley on the LSAT

mean frequently though not necessarily most of the time

Probably and other "tendency words"

mean most

Some/Most Valid argument form 3: A most B-->C

means A most C

Some most valid argument from two. A some B-->C (all bs are C)

means A some C

some

means at least once

logically follows

means inference aka what can be inferred

the term "tends to be"

means more than 50% of teh time.

often

means some

not all

means some not

Many

means some: when you see the word many they mean some

Some/Most Valid Argument form 4: A---> B and A---C

means that B some C ( there will be some ABC's)

key correlation term

more "likely",

Inference Questions Right Answer

most clearly supportd by the text, it can even be a really small infernece.. Just make sure it is the most most provable choice

Inference on the lsat means

must be true

Contraiction on the LSAT

mutuallly exclusive or 2 things that cannot be both true it cant be both example: it cant be both wednesday and saturday

parochial

narrow in viewpoint

takes for granted

necessary assumption

Wrong answers for MBT questions: context specific issues

need more context to be true and the stimulus doesnt give us the context we need.

Rule for translating group 3 logical indicators

negate on e of teh terms and make hat idea the suffcient condition

negation test for necessary assumption quetsions

negate the answer choice and see if the argument can still stand/ is valid.

Ad homineum critques

neverwork, you can never critique a person to say what they are saying= wrong. Just because someone has bias does not mean what they are saying is wrong

Some+Some intersection

no inference

relationship between percentage and total

no relationship aka: ading more people into your pop will explain why more of them get sick ut not exlain why a greater percentage of them get sick. To do rhat you need to showthat something happened to get more [people with the flu to move in or to increase the changes tha t people have the flu

Negation of some

none

Examples for arguments that illystrate the conclusion

often belong on the conlcusion side.. they are things that we have to prove

number vs percentage issues

often come up in resolve the discrepency questions. When they falely equate different terms and ask you to come up with an explanation for why something happened. like why did the number go up but the percentage go down (the total went down)

principle questions

often have outcomes not a conclusion per say.

The word similarity

often indicates analogy

Reference phrases like "this"

often refers to an entire statement fo fact. Ex: "this example"

When the authhor rejects one option and says that the answer MUST BEanother optino.. then this argument is flaws in two ways

one it is flawed because they are rejecting the possiblity of something else aka nota does not mean b it could also be c Also they are rejecting the possiblity of both aka.. just becuase on didnt exclusively casue the phenonono does not mean taht it could be a partial cause.

no key word to tell you if it is sufficient or necessary then assume it is necessary

or required assumption

Common . type of Dichotomy flaw

overlooking the middle option

There is a difference between strengthen / weaken questions and overlooks the possibility

overlooks the possibility= has a bit more burden of proof/ exactly describes the flaw. What they are asking you is more directly related to the conclusion.. pay attention to the conclusion for these kinds of questions. make sure the answer jchose its something they overlook/ something that would not be true based on the conclusion

percent problems

parts vs whole

What does "safety" mean on the LSAT

percentage or the likelihood of injury or harm

tough causal questions

pick an answer and see if there is a way for you to make it an alternatve explanation.

for each of the following could be. true EXCEPT questions

pick the answer that contradicts the point said in the stimulus. even if there is a chance it is vague or too strong and not directly disproven by stim

for arguments that have conditional like her there is a very simple bridging required assumption and the question is in the first 13

pick the answer that provides the bridging required assumption and don't overthink

best way to weaken possible/probable cause question

relationship= reversed probablyem with data c causes a and b other alt explanation and a notb/ b nota answers are not like to work

Many= some

remember

notes for touch underlying principle questions

remember for principle questions that and especially none conditional one's.... the terms in the principle may be equivalent to the terms in the stim like must pick traditional one- must not pick non traditional one. however, it will usually be specific so watch out for principles that are too general

For which question would be useful to evaluate questions

remember the answer aka the question that would be useful to ask to evaluate the argument won't be too specific or extreme.. aka just kinda like strengthen and weaken.. knowing smethng small and specific like would their heads be the SAME size wouldn'tt give us the right info.

The argument assumes that

required assumption question.

Common Invalid Form 2: Aka statement means the negation must be true

s---> b not s---> not b

whenever u see rates or stats.

significant chance it is causal reasoning

formula for principle questions

situation then outcome.. usual formula for the principle

conform to the principle questions

skim conclusion and make sure you have a rule to prove it

tip to eliminate answers right off the bat with principle questions

skim the conclusions and make sure you have a specific rule that can prove it works with principles that are conditionally based aka x--y if he conclusions says x will happen if eliminate.. we dotnkoow want thing about when x will happen.

Some/Most Valid Argument form 6: A-->.B; A most-> C

so B some C (therewill be an intersection)

Common wrong answer: inverse and converse

so if the right answer is x--> y the wrong answer qil say y--> x or not x--->noty

Intersection of some

some As are B= at least of 1 A will have B quality

few

some do most don't

few meaning

some do most dont

Negation for all

some...not (you are denying the relationship exists or saying there is at least one exception to that relationship_

Invalid Argument form 4: (most issue)

t--->m-most> H.D. t most--> H.D. False.. There could be ony a few ts and therefore only a few ms that are aso ts.( TM is a small porprtion os teh total ms). Then the ms that H.D.

Most common way to strenethe correlation=cusation questions

take alterative epxantion out of the picture aka it annot be that

Type of necessary assumption: Blocking

tehe assumption says that some information that owuld destroy the argument isnt true so it blacks other details/ peices of information that owuld wriect the argument.

for necessary assumption questions= we LOVE soft language

tend to e some, etc.

If you see a stim with a sampling flaw (makes a generalised statement about society based on srveying college students example) and you have an answer choice that says : draws a universal conlcusion on the basis of a smallnumber of individual cases

that answer will only be correct if we know how many individual cases there are aka how manypeople were surveyed. Otherwise, we dont know that a small number= were surveyed.

"must be assumed for conclusion to be properly drawn"

that is a necessary assumption question.

The word "that" almost always indicates that there is a modifier

that= modifier

evaluate the argument questions are kind of like strengthen/weaken questions

the answer choice will help reveal if teh argument is strong or weak.

Use the fill in the blank method for lr questions

the answer choices will usually be ver general so one tactic that you can use for figuring out what the right answer will be is to match each part of teh answer choice to a corresponding bit in the question stem.

for principle questions aka the statment above corresponds to which of the following principles

the answer may not always be identicial with each term. Some terms= maybe analogous.

Examples of circular reasoning

the argument assumes what it seeks to establish the argument conclsiion merely paraphrases the argument argument preculdes the possibiity of pdisconfirming evidence.

common circular reasoning answers

the argument assumes what it seems to establish, conclusion just parphrases it's evidence. the argument preculdes the possibility of disconfirming evidence. the argument is a tautology

For MBT tqusiosn and other questions too...Answer choices with words liike "before" or "previously" will usually ask you to make an assumption

the assumpion will be that jsut becuse it happened in teh past it wl keep happening in teh future.

LSAT and astatiscs

the lsat often takes statiscs to mean more than ty do and makes a larg eleap of causlaity after igiving you a stat ex: 80% of vegetarians dont ahve high bp. so if you want to lower bp stop eating meat.

MSS questions

they are asking you to find the conclusion an the conclusion is tucked away in the answer choices. aka what does the evidence in the stim let you say/lead you to predict.

Remember that when an argues talk about what "most want to do"

they have to make sure that the action coresspondsto what the most want to do and isn't just coming up with a random statement.

Standard problem/flaw that you see in questions that have comparative statements:

they say, "bc of X factor, therefore A is "better" than B at doing Y (in this case greater acceptance..)" then they must assume A is "better" at that X factor (metaphor more pervasive) than B In other words, B is "not as good" at that X factor as A,

Argument Part Questions are similar to method of reasoning questions

they use a lot of referential phrasing

answer choice: it is used to illustrate the general principle the argument presupposes

this answer choice describes an assumption that the argument is based upon. aka underlying principle means sufficient assumption

whenever the author says someone else is wrong without actually addressing the other persons argument

this is a flaw

The argument makes which one of the following assumptions?

this is a necessary assumption issue.

When a question stem reads "this argument can most easily be used as support for..."

this is an mss question. The answer choices they are asked you to find something you can conclude from it.

mete

to distribute by or as if by measure; allot

Explictation

to explain

stultify

to make ineffective or useless, cripple; to have a dulling effect on

Proscribe definition

to prohibit or denounce as dangeorus

forbear

to refrain from

redress

to set right, remedy; relief from wrong or injury

MBT questions wrong choices

too general, not enough context aka the passage doesnt give you enough info to support a specific answer choice.

when faced with a stem about analogies and they are asking for assumptions/ strengthen and weaken

try to match up the different parts of each analogy

Unequivacal

unambiguous and clear of meaning

Group 3 logical indicators

unless, until, or, without

Paralle method of reasoning

uses a lot of law pic

Assumptioins are

uspoken evidence

Right answers for MBT questions

usually jsut need one case to be true so if they say that this sometimes happens then if it happens once this answer will be correct

the terms but or howerver

usually preceed the conlcuion

MSS

watch out for answers that are to gen. be clear about what the subject mart will be

necesssary assumption

we are not trying to make the argument valid.

Correlation= can also be expressed as contrast between groups

women are 300 times more likely to wear lipstick than men. shw sthat there is a correlation between wearing lipstick and being a woman.

when faced with a stem you just eally dnt understand.

write it out in complete sentences in your own words

z some y and z all x meabs

y some x

Point at Issue Questions

you can use the chart method to solev. Make a chart next to answer choice and make a chart about whether they agree. disagree or have no opnion with the topic discussed in the answer choice. You are looking for a situation where non epersona agreees and tehother disgrees. ( so you ar elooking for a check and an x)

Flaw: Relying on atypicalexmplaes

you cannot justify something depending on the outliers because it was not representative aka an unrepresentative sample.

comparison

you must say that as one value changes the other does to or there must be a comparison between two groups.

to detmermine if a percentage means anything aka is high or low

you need a compairson fctor... otherwise you wouldnt know if it is high or low for that particular issue.

for likely yo mean a correlation

you need a comparison example more likely. correlatoosn could also have a chronology aka whenever x happens y happens