LSAT (Law School Admission Test) Logical Reasoning: Question Types and Methods Syllabus

What does a Main Point / Main Conclusion question ask, and how do you locate the conclusion?

It asks for the argument's primary conclusion. Locate it by finding the claim everything else supports. Use the Conclusion Test: 'Therefore, [X]'—the main conclusion is what the premises lead to, not what supports another claim.

What is a subsidiary (intermediate) conclusion, and why is it a common wrong answer in Main Conclusion questions?

An intermediate conclusion is supported by some premises but itself supports the main conclusion. It's a trap in Main Conclusion questions because it looks like a conclusion but is actually used as a premise for the final claim.

What does a Cannot Be True question ask for?

It asks which answer choice CANNOT be true (is impossible/inconsistent) given the stimulus. The correct answer contradicts or is incompatible with the statements; the four wrong answers each could be true alongside the stimulus.

What does a Method of Reasoning question ask, and what should the answer describe?

It asks HOW the argument proceeds—the abstract structure or technique used to reach the conclusion (e.g., analogy, counterexample, ruling out alternatives). The answer describes the argumentative strategy, not the specific content or whether it is flawed.

What does a Role of a Statement (argument part) question ask, and what is the first step to answer it?

It asks for the function a specified statement plays in the argument (e.g., premise, main conclusion, intermediate conclusion, counter-premise, or claim the argument opposes). First step: identify the main conclusion, then determine how the cited statement relates to it (supports it, is supported, or is argued against).

What does a Point at Issue / Disagreement question ask, and what two-part test confirms the answer?

It asks what two speakers disagree (or, in 'agree' variants, agree) about. Test: the correct answer must be a statement on which (1) Speaker A has a clear view and (2) Speaker B has a clear opposing view. If either speaker has no stated opinion on it, it's wrong.

What is the Agree/Disagree Test used for Point at Issue questions?

For each answer choice, ask: would Speaker 1 say true/false, and would Speaker 2 say the opposite? The correct disagreement answer gets a definite 'yes' from one and 'no' from the other; if either speaker would say 'don't know/no opinion,' eliminate it.

What is a Principle (Identify/Apply) question, and what are its two main forms?

It involves a general rule (principle). Two forms: (1) Identify—find the principle that the argument/situation conforms to or that justifies the conclusion; (2) Apply—use a given principle to judge a specific case. Treat the principle as a broad conditional rule linking circumstances to a judgment.

How should you approach matching a specific case to a principle in Principle questions?

Translate the principle into a conditional (if conditions, then judgment). Then check whether the specific case satisfies the triggering conditions, and whether the resulting judgment matches. The correct answer's facts must fully meet the principle's conditions for the conclusion to follow.

What does a Parallel Reasoning question ask, and what features must the correct answer match?

It asks for the answer whose argument structure most closely parallels the stimulus. Match the logical form: the type/strength of conclusion, the relationship among premises, and the validity. Content/topic need NOT match—only the abstract structure.

How does a Parallel Flaw question differ from a standard Parallel Reasoning question?

In a Parallel Flaw question the stimulus argument is flawed, and the correct answer must commit the SAME flaw in addition to having parallel structure. First identify the specific flaw, then find the choice that repeats that exact reasoning error.

In Parallel Reasoning, what should you check first to eliminate answers quickly?

Match the conclusion first: its certainty/modality (must, probably, could, should) and whether it's positive/negative, conditional, comparative, or a recommendation. Then match premise count and the logical relationships. Mismatched conclusion type eliminates a choice immediately.

What does a Paradox / Discrepancy question ask, and what must the correct answer do?

It presents two seemingly conflicting or surprising facts and asks for the choice that resolves/explains them. The correct answer reconciles BOTH facts—showing how both can be true simultaneously—rather than supporting one and ignoring the other.

What does an Explain the Result question ask, and what is the test for a correct answer?

It gives a surprising result/outcome and asks for the choice that best explains why it occurred. Test: the correct answer must make the result no longer surprising while remaining consistent with all stated facts; it accounts for the specific outcome described.

How do you distinguish 'resolving a discrepancy' from 'establishing a contradiction'?

Resolving a discrepancy means finding additional information that lets two surprising facts coexist (they are not truly contradictory). A genuine contradiction cannot be resolved—both statements cannot be true. LSAT paradox questions assume the facts are reconcilable, so seek the explanation, not a way to negate one fact.

What is prephrasing in Logical Reasoning, and why is it valuable?

Prephrasing is anticipating the correct answer (or the gap/assumption) before reading the choices. It is valuable because it makes you less susceptible to tempting wrong answers, speeds up matching, and forces active engagement with the argument's logic.

Which question types are best suited to prephrasing, and what should you prephrase for each?

Assumption/Strengthen/Weaken: prephrase the logical gap between premise and conclusion. Main Conclusion: prephrase the conclusion. Flaw: prephrase the error. Inference: prephrase combinable statements. The gap/assumption is the most universally useful thing to prephrase.

Describe the 'out of scope / irrelevant' wrong-answer type.

An answer that introduces a consideration not relevant to the argument's conclusion—addressing a different issue, comparison, or group than the one at stake. It may be true but does nothing to the specific reasoning being tested.

Describe the 'opposite answer' wrong-answer type and where it appears.

A choice that does the reverse of what's asked—e.g., weakening when the question asks to strengthen, or vice versa. It's tempting because it's clearly relevant and strongly worded, but it has the wrong direction of effect.

Describe the 'too strong / too extreme' wrong-answer type.

An answer with overly absolute or sweeping language (all, none, never, always, only) that exceeds what the stimulus supports. Common in inference and Must Be True questions where the text only justifies a moderate claim.

Describe the 'half-right / partial' wrong-answer type.

An answer where one clause is correct and another is wrong (e.g., right subject, wrong action; or a true statement paired with a false one). Because part of it matches, it's tempting, but any wrong portion makes the entire choice wrong.

What is a 'reversed/distorted relationship' wrong answer (e.g., sufficient/necessary or causal reversal)?

A choice that swaps the terms of a relationship—reversing a conditional (mistaking the converse), flipping cause and effect, or inverting a comparison—so it sounds on-topic but states the relationship backward.

What is a 'no such comparison / unsupported comparison' wrong answer?

An answer that ranks or compares two things when the stimulus never established a comparison between them. The argument supports a claim about one item but not a relative claim, so the comparative answer overreaches.

What is Process of Elimination discipline in Logical Reasoning, and when is it most useful?

Systematically reading every choice and eliminating those with a concrete flaw, keeping the one that survives even if it seems awkward. Most useful when no answer matches your prephrase, on Flaw/Method/Parallel/Principle questions, and when deciding between two contenders—compare them against the exact task.

When two answer choices remain, what comparative technique resolves the choice?

Compare them directly against the precise question task and the stimulus: find the one word or clause that differs and test whether it's supported. Eliminate the choice with any unsupported, too-strong, out-of-scope, or wrong-direction element; the other is correct.

What is a 'scope shift' in an LSAT argument, and why does it matter?

A scope shift occurs when the conclusion addresses a different subject, group, time, or concept than the premises (e.g., premises about 'cost,' conclusion about 'value'). It signals an assumption/gap and is frequently the basis for the answer in assumption, flaw, strengthen, and weaken questions.

What is a 'degree shift' in an argument, and how does it create vulnerability?

A degree shift is a change in the strength/quantity of a claim—premises support 'some' or 'may' but the conclusion asserts 'most,' 'all,' or 'will.' The unjustified jump in degree is a flaw and a common target for weakening or for identifying the necessary assumption.

What is the difference between a quantitative term like 'some' and 'most,' and why track these on the LSAT?

'Some' means at least one (1 to all); 'most' means more than half (over 50%). Tracking quantifiers prevents degree-shift errors—e.g., you cannot validly conclude 'most' from premises that only establish 'some,' and combining 'most' statements rarely yields a valid 'most' chain.

How can spotting a scope or degree shift help you prephrase an assumption?

The necessary assumption typically bridges the shift—it equates or links the premise's term/degree to the conclusion's. Once you locate the new term or stronger claim in the conclusion, prephrase the assumption as the statement connecting it back to the premises (e.g., 'cost = value' or 'some applies to all').