LSAT PrepTest 44 Section 3 Question 22 Explanation | Logic Games

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


This Logic Games question is from the October 2004 LSAT.


Now, let's create a diagram using the same symbols as on our last Games question, Question 8. The symbols are XYZ and the diagram, a simple table as always, has the days of the week in it (R = Thursday). Let's go through the answer choices and eliminate them one by one. We'll see if we can make one of them work, starting with A, which has Monday as the only day she parks at a $10 lot. The dollar pattern must be, given the rules (R = 15, W > F):

M | T | W | R | F |
10 | 12| 15| 15| 12|

Now, can we assign the letters XYZ in accordance with the rules? X = 10 can't be true, since it must be more than Z. If X = 10 isn't true, there's no way for her to park at Z more than X (since if X were 15 or 12, , there is no number Z could be assigned to that has more instances, as the rules require). So we'll scratch A and try B, with the only day at a $10 lot being Tuesday.


M | T | W | R | F |
12 | 10| 15| 15| 12|

Can we assign XYZ in accordance with the rules? X = 10 can't be true, nor can X = 12 (since there must be more instances of Z than X), nor can X = 15. Scratch B, since it provides no place for X, and move on to C, with Monday and Tuesday being $10 days:


M | T | W | R | F |
10 | 10| 15| 15| 12|

Can we assign XYZ and fit the rules? Sure, X = 12 can be true if Z = 10 and Y = 15, so that there are more instances of Z than X and the other rules are followed. So C is correct.

What we did here was a form of trial and error, the main way in which Games questions are solved. If our Question 8 diagrams had included any of the possibilities in these answer choices, we could've answered the question right there, but we weren't so lucky. So, we just go through the answer choices.

Remember:

1) Try to re-use old diagrams from previous questions in the game if you can. Here, we could not, but sometimes they will answer the questions for you.

2) Use a table with symbols in it as your diagram that will help you answer the questions.

3) If you don't see a simpler way quickly, start going through the answer choices to eliminate them and find the one that works.


LSAT PrepTest 44 Section 2 Question 5 Explanation | Logical Reasoning

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


This Logical Reasoning question is from the October 2004 LSAT.


Let's make a chain, or diagram of how the argument's logic works, to better understand it:

Adult musicians have bigger corpus callosa (CC's) --> adults who trained at 7 have even bigger CC's --> Music, especially if begun early, expands the CC

Do you see the jump here, the place where the logic needs an extra assumption in order to make sense? It's just before the final statement, the conclusion, and it's basically a matter of equating correlation and causation (of having bigger CC's). Adult musicians end up with bigger CC's than adult non-musicians, and the argument says this is because of their musical training earlier in life.

Let's pre-phrase an answer here so we don't have to plod through the wrong answers and can more quickly find the right choice. For it to be true that adult musicians have bigger CC's because of previous musical training, we would need to assume they didn't tend to have bigger CC's than non-musicians beforehand. If that pre-phrase didn't occur to you, no problem, you can still go through each answer choice, which we will do now.

A) Correct.

B) This assumption isn't needed because it's beyond the question's scope. Even if musical training later in life did affect CC size, it could still be true that previous musical training increased the size of the CC's of musicians so much that they still tend to be bigger than those who only took up music later in life.

C) Tricky, but not a needed assumption because it's beyond the question's scope. It isn't comparing musicians to musicians, but rather musicians to non-musicians, so whether a few musicians already had larger CC's than other musicians is irrelevant.

D) Not a necessary assumption because, again, it's beyond the scope of the argument. It isn't talking about every musician having a bigger CC than all non-musicians, just that the former group tends to have larger CC's.

E) Once again, not a needed assumption since it falls beyond the argument's scope. It isn't saying that adult non-musicians never enhanced their CC size in any way, but only that the ultimately ended up with smaller CC's than musicians. It could be that non-musicians enhanced their CC size a lot in various non-musical ways, but still not as much as musicians enhanced their CC size with musical training.

Remember:

1) Write down a few words that make a chain of the argument's logic, so you can see how it progresses and, in assumption questions, find the jump in it, the place where an additional assumption is needed for the logic to make sense.

2) Pay very close attention to the question's scope, what it's saying and what it isn't saying. If the claim in the answer choice is beyond the question's scope (if it's something the question wasn't talking about), it cannot be an assumption the argument needs. As you can see on this question and many others, it can eliminate a great deal of answer choices.

3) Try to pre-phrase an answer when possible, but if you cannot think of anything, don't spend too much time doing this. Just head on to the answer choices.

LSAT PrepTest 44 Section 1 Question Explanation | Reading Comprehension

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


This Reading Comprehension question is from the October 2004 LSAT.


First, let's look back at the paragraph summaries we wrote down during Question 6:

Paragraph 1 = historiography of frontier is by white explorers and written down

Paragraph 2 = should consider actions of Asian immigrants in frontier

Paragraph 3 = Chinese had an important view of and impact on the land

To this, we'll add:

Author's opinion = using actions as sources helps historiography by broadening it

Now, can we pre-phrase this question? Not really, since the author could disagree with a number of different things. So we'll just have to look at the answer choices, keeping in mind our summaries, and eliminate four of them.

A) Not likely, because the author says history "cannot confine itself
to a narrow record of experience" (line 28) and wants all perspectives. Why would he disagree with a statement that promotes the inclusion of some group's experience? Our "author's opinion" summary helps here.

B) No, he says "some historiographers have recently recognized the need to
expand their definition of what a source is" (16). Our Paragraph 2 summary and looking back at the passage helps here.

C) No, for the same reasons as A. The "author's opinion" summary shows the first part isn't something he'd disagree with; it surely adds to the history. And since he wants all perspectives, and the Asian perspective is just one, he wouldn't disagree that it "does not complete" the history.

D) No. Our summary of Paragraph 2 answers this.

E) Correct. This choice is beyond the scope of the passage. The author never says that the expanded definition of a source is useful only for looking at the Asian experience.

Remember:

1) Read the passage carefully but not too slowly before looking at the questions. You can't remember all the questions while reading the passage anyway, and you'll end up searching for answers for so long if you don't read the passage that it will waste time.

2) Write short summaries of each paragraph, just a word or two, next to it, to give you an idea of its structure and where key evidence can be found, since you can't memorize it all.

3) Look back at the passage whenever necessary. Again, your object is to understand it, not memorize it.

4) Eliminate answers one-by-one if you cannot pre-phrase a response.

5) Watch out for answer choices beyond the passage's scope.


LSAT PrepTest 44 Section 3 Question 20 Explanation | Logic Games

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


This Logic Games question is from the October 2004 LSAT.


We can use a table as our diagram for this question. It will be made up of the days of the week, Monday through Friday. Our symbols that we'll put into the diagram will be X, Y, and Z, the three lots, and the prices of each lot, since we don't yet know which price X and Y have. Let's make the table (R = Thursday) and fill it in with symbols, using trial and error and conforming to the rules in the set-up and the question:

M | T | W | R | F |

Z12 |Y10| Z12 |X15 | Y10|

I'll walk you through the trial and error a little more than usual, since we have two kinds of symbols, which makes it more complex:

1) We know Z = 12, and since X costs more, it must be = 15, and Y = 10.

2) Put 15 in the R spot, following the set-up rule.

3) Put Y in the F spot, since it's cheaper than Z, and put Z in the W spot, following the set-up rules.

4) Since Z must be used on more days than X, put it in on Monday and fill the final slot, T, with Y.

5) Check to see that all this still fits with the rules. It does.

Okay, now we proceed to the answer choices to eliminate some of them. Remember, since this is a must question, if any choice doesn't agree with our diagram, it's out, since that shows it doesn't have to be true.

A) Incorrect, doesn't fit our diagram.

B) Could be.

C) Incorrect, conflicts with diagram.

D) Incorrect, doesn't fit diagram.

E) Could be.

So, as is the case with many of these questions, we need to retool our diagram to eliminate one more answer choice. So, again using trial and error, we come up with another set-up that fits the rules (since there was no reason why we had to put Y on Tuesday, we can just switch Monday and Tuesday):

M | T | W | R | F |
Y10 |Z12| Z12 |X15 | Y10|

Now, we reevaluate B and E.

B) Wrong, doesn't fit diagram.

E) Correct.



Remember:

1) Make a diagram and put the symbols in it. A table will work for virtually any LSAT Game. It's fast, simple, and effective.

2) Use trial and error to make diagrams that fit the rules, and retool them when they don't eliminate 4 answer choices.

3) On must questions ("must be true," etc.) remember that if an answer choice doesn't agree with your diagram, you can eliminate it. After all, if it had to be true, and your diagram is right, it would have to agree with your diagram.


LSAT PrepTest 44 Section 1 Question 23 Explanation | Logical Reasoning

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


This Logical Reasoning question is from the October 2004 LSAT.


To solve this question, we have the understand its logic, so we can find the assumption needed to make the logic work. Let's quickly map out, in a chain how the argument progresses; you may want to write a word or two next to the question or underline a few words on test day, but it can also be done mentally:

Technology --> Less drudgery --> dependency/less self-sufficiency --> loss of overall well-being.

Such a diagram with arrows helps us see how the argument progresses. We see that it connects technology with less overall well-being, in the end. It also jumps from "self-sufficiency" to "well-being," saying that less of the former means an overall decrease of the latter.

What assumption is needed to make that jump? Let's pre-phrase an answer, to help us find the right answer more quickly rather than plodding through the 4 wrong ones and wasting precious time. The assumption is something like "there is a connection between self-sufficiency and well-being."

Scanning the answer choices, we notice that choice B fits that pre-phrase very well. Let's go through the other answer choices to see why they're wrong.

A) This assumption isn't required and is beyond the argument's scope, since the argument isn't saying physical labor is always necessary. It's just saying that, seeing how modern technology does some good but reduces self-sufficiency, the bad outweighs the good. If technology's advantages were way bigger, maybe physical labor ending would be all right.

B) Correct. If this wasn't assumed, if self-sufficiency didn't influence well-being, then the jump would not be bridged and the logic of the argument wouldn't work, since it less self-sufficency has to cause less wellbeing.

C) This is beyond the argument's scope. This assumption isn't required because the argument just says that how modern technology lessens labor (has us rely on things besides our own capacities) reduces self-sufficiency (freedom), not that any lessening of labor does this.

D) Again, beyond the argument's scope. It just mentions a loss in "life's charm" as an aside. Our chain shows us that the conclusion rests on how technology reduces overall wellbeing.

E) Once again, beyond the argument's scope. It talks about modern technology. Future technology or older technologies (even ancient stone tools are considered technologies, usually) might be different, so technology doesn't "inherently" limit wellbeing.

Remember:

1) Think of or briefly right down a chain that tracks the progression of the argument and try to find a jump in it, a place where the logic breaks down and the next step doesn't follow without an extra assumption, on assumption questions.

2) Pre-phrase an answer whenever possible. Just get an idea, in your head or briefly written down, of what the answer should be before you look at the questions. It will help you weed out wrong answers more quickly, which is vital on a tightly-timed test like this.

3) Eliminate answer choices that are beyond the scope of the argument. If the issue in the answer choice is not mentioned at all in the argument or doesn't form a part of its conclusion, that is not the assumption you're looking for. On LR and RC questions, this can eliminate a great deal of wrong answer choices.

LSAT PrepTest 44 Section 3 Question 4 Explanation | Logic Games

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


This Logic Games question is from the October 2004 LSAT.


Following what we did on Question 2, our previous Games question, we won't be symbolizing the rules, but we will make a symbol for each quantity (in this case, each dignitary). Using the first letter of each name, we have:

FMRST

Next, we make a diagram of the situation in which we put the symbols. Garibaldi is meeting with them for a total of 7 times, so we'll make the same sort of table we made last time. That kind of table works for almost any LSAT Game. (It's hard to show this in a blog, but just imagine the lines between the numbers extended downward to make a table).

1 | 2| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6| 7|

And we'll symbolize the question, with S going before R:

S - R

Now, using trial and error and following the rules the game's set-up gave us and the S - R rule, we'll place the symbols into the diagram.

1 | 2| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6| 7|
F | T | S | R| F |M| F|

That fits with the set-up rules and the S - R rule in the question. So, let's see which answer choices we can eliminate. Since this is a "must be true" question, if an answer choice doesn't fit with our diagram, we can eliminate it. After all, if it had to be true, our diagram couldn't be in conflict with it.

A) This doesn't have to be true, since our diagram conflicts with it, and our diagram is right.

B) This might be true, it fits our diagram.

C) Might be true.

D) Need not be true.

E) Might be true.

So we can see that we need to retool our diagram to eliminate more answer choices, which is fine. We have B, C, and E. Let's try a new diagram, again arrived at by trial and error:

1 | 2| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6| 7|
F| M | F | T | S |R |F|

B) Wrong, doesn't fit our diagram.

C) Doesn't fit our diagram.

E) Correct.


Remember:

1) Make a symbol for each quantity, usually using the first letter in its name.

2) Make a diagram in which you put the symbols. A simple table will answer almost any LSAT question very quickly. No need for anything fancy. Be sure to make a diagram, though; practically every game needs one for most or all of its questions. You can either make a separate diagram for each question or one for the whole game. The latter option is better, I think, because it saves time.

3) Don't try to work out the implications of the rules in the set-up right away. We could have deduced a number of things from the rules above, by why not wait until you see the questions? That way, if the deduction wasn't needed, you didn't waste precious time doing it.

4) Eliminate answers on "must be true" questions by seeing if the answer choices ever conflict with your diagram. If so, the answer choice need not be true. It could true, possibly, but it doesn't have to be true.

5) Retool your diagram if the first diagram didn't eliminate 4 answer choices. This can be done quickly by just extending the lines in the table, not drawing a new table every time.

6) Arrive at different diagrams by trial and error, seeing where you should put the symbols according to the set-up rules and the question.

LSAT PrepTest 44 Section 2 Question 17 Explanation | Logical Reasoning

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


This Logical Reasoning question is from the October 2004 LSAT.


The stimulus provides a set of figures, the percentage of the bird's weight that its egg represents, for several different types of birds, and the figures differ significantly. The idea is the ratio of the egg's weight to the bird's weight, not the absolute weight of the egg of bird. It's a comparison.

Given that, we should pre-phrase an answer, like we did on Question 1, our most recent Logical Reasoning question. This helps us find the right answer more quickly and not get bogged down in wrong ones. What "proposition" does the argument illustrate? Well, considering the evidence, maybe it illustrates something like "the egg weight to body weight ratios are smaller among bigger birds."

Looking at our answer choices using our pre-phrase, we see that it fits C well. Since this is practice, let's go through the other 4 answers so we know why they're wrong.

A) The argument says nothing about comparing the weight of eggs to their volume. This out of the scope of the argument. It might be true, but the argument says nothing about it.

B) This is wrong because it's saying that lighter birds lay heavier eggs. The argument says just the opposite, that the heavier birds like the goose and ostrich are much heavier than those of the light hummingbird.

C) Correct.

D) The argument doesn't support this; this is the opposite of what the argument is saying. The argument says that geese and ostriches, which are much larger than hummingbirds, also have much larger eggs, so there is a correlation between egg size and adult bird size.

E) This is beyond the scope of the argument. It says nothing about birds varying more in egg size and in body weight. It says only that they do vary in both those quantities. It doesn't say if one varies more than the other. So, it cannot be the "proposition" the argument illustrates.

Remember:

1) As in Question 1, keep a look out for answer choices that are the opposite of what the passage is saying or are out of the scope of the passage, especially in Logical Reasoning sections. However, this is helpful in Reading Comprehension too.

2) Pre-phrase an answer based on your analysis of the question before you even look at the answer choices. That way, you'll know the right answer your looking for. Time is a big factor for most LSAT-takers...they don't have enough of it. Pre-phrasing can let you answer questions more quickly.

Free Sample LSAT Reading Comprehension Passage

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


Starting tomorrow, I'm going to explain actual LSAT questions from October 2004.


Out of the four graded sections on the LSAT, 2 are Logical Reasoning (Arguments), 1 is Analytical Reasoning (Games), and one is Reading Comprehension, the area we'll cover today. Below is a passage very similar to what you will see on the LSAT. I have bolded a few key words. When you're reading passages in practice and on test day, it might help to mark key parts of the passage, but don't overdo it. (The numbers in the passage are just to mark the lines, for reference.)

Question 3

The Acme Steel Corporation Benefit Plan, designed to give
active and retired steelworkers and their families access to totally
prepaid or partially paid healthcare, has
was founded in 1991. Workers have
the option of using either Acme’s staff doctors,
whose services are paid for by the company, or an outside doctor.
Outside doctors can either sign up with the plan as a
“cooperating doctor” and accept the ACME’s set fee,
or they can charge a higher fee and collect the rest
(10)from the patient. Steelworkers like the notion of prepaid
medical services: 45 percent of eligible union
members were enrolled in the plan by 1993.
Also, the idea of insurance for health services for both current and retired workers has been
spreading in the corporate world. Many Fortune 500
Companies have begun doing it.

While many plan members seem to be happy to
get reduced-cost medical help, many doctors are
concerned about the plan’s effect on their profession,
especially its impact on prices for medical care.
(20)Some point out that even though most doctors have
not joined the plan as cooperating doctors, medical fees
in the cities where the ACME plan operates have
been dropping, in some cases to an unprofitable
level. The directors of the plan, however, claim that
both patients and doctors benefit from it.
For while the patients get can easily get
reduced-price services, doctors get professional
contact with people who would not otherwise be
using medical services much, which helps generate even more
(30) business for them. Studies demonstrate, the
directors say, that if people are referred to a doctor and
receive excellent service, the doctor will get three to
four other referrals who are not plan subscribers and
who would therefore pay the doctor’s standard rate.

However, increased use of such plans
probably will not result in long-term patient satisfaction or in a
substantial increase in profits for doctors. Since
doctors with established reputations and patient bases
can benefit little, if at all, from participation, the
(40) plans function largely as marketing devices for
doctors who have yet to establish themselves. While
many of these doctors are no doubt very able and
conscientious, they will tend to have less expertise
and to provide less effective care to patients. At the same
time, the downward pressure on fees will mean that
the full-fee referrals that proponents say will come
through plan participation may not make up for a
doctor’s investment in providing services at low plan
rates. And since lowered fees provide little incentive
(50) for doctors to devote more than minimal effort to
cases, a “volume discount” approach toward the
practice of medicine will mean less time devoted to
complex maladies and a general lowering of quality for
patients.

What description most completely and accurately corresponds to the presentation of material in this passage?

A) a description of a recently implemented set of
procedures and policies; a summary of the
results of that implementation; a proposal of
refinements in those policies and procedures

B) an evaluation of a recent phenomenon; a
comparison of that phenomenon with related
past phenomena; an expression of the author’s
approval of that phenomenon

C) a presentation of a proposal; a discussion of the
prospects for implementing that proposal; a
recommendation by the author that the
proposal be rejected

D) a description of an innovation; a report of
reasoning against and reasoning favoring that
innovation; argumentation by the author
concerning that innovation

E) an explanation of a recent occurrence; an
evaluation of the practical value of that
occurrence; a presentation of further data
regarding that occurrence

Solution

What this question is asking us to do is find out the passage's organization, and see which answer choice best describes that organization. This is a common type of question in Reading Comprehension. Let's start to eliminate answer choices based on the first part of their descriptions of the passage.

A) This fits, the first paragraph "procedures" for what doctors plan members can have and the "policies" for reimbursement.

B) The passage doesn't being with an evaluation of the program. It just describes it and doesn't evaluate it as effective or ineffective.

C) It doesn't begin with a "proposal"; the program described is already in practice, it isn't being proposed.

D) This might be right, because the passage does begin with a description.

E) The passage begins with description, not "explanation of a recent occurence." The author is just laying out the details of a plan, not trying to explain the plan's existence.

So, we're left with A and D. Let's look at the last part of each description and eliminate one of those.

A) The end of the passage doesn't propose "refinements" but just says that the way the plan is currently structured may result in poor medical care. It gives a problem but no solution.

D) Correct. The passage does end with an "argumentation by the author" that this type of healthcare plan may reduce the quality of care. We know this because we were sure to look back at the passage.

Remember:

1) Read the passage. Sounds like a no-brainer, but some test preparation materials advise people to just read the sections of the passage pertaining to each question. This often has people taking more time to read the passage than if they had read it the first time, and often results in a lot of wrong answers.

2) Look back at the passage to find specific parts, if needed. Don't try to memorize it. If you read the passage carefully before looking at the questions, you should be able to find specific information quickly anyway.

3) Ignore the questions until you've finished reading the passage. Reading the questions first does no good because most anyone will be unable to remember them all at once while reading the passage anyway.

4) Eliminate answer choices based on even a single element in them. Just go down the list of responses and find what disqualifies them, on this type of question.

5) Mark the passage so you can find key evidence. This helps almost everyone. Don't get carried away and mark everything though, just key points. Writing a word or two alongside the passage that summarizes each paragraph is sometimes helpful too, to give you an overview of the passage.

Free Sample LSAT Logic Game

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


The following is a sample Analytical Reasoning (Logic Games) question. Be sure to leave comments if you'd like clarification, have another way to solve it, etc.


In a week, a man buys exactly six goods...greens, ham, keel, liver, pastrami, and sausage. Two are bought on Monday, 2 on Tuesday, and the last 2 on Wednesday, under these conditions:

The liver is bought on the same day as the pastrami.

The greens are not bought on the same day as the ham.

If the keel is bought on Monday, the greens are bought on Tuesday.

If the sausage is bought on Wednesday, the ham is bought on Tuesday.

If the ham is bought on the day before the sausage, then which one of the following CANNOT be true?

A) The ham is bought on Monday.

B) The keel is bought on Monday.

C) The greens are bought on Tuesday.

D) The pastrami is bought on Tuesday.

E) The pastrami is bought on Wednesday.

Solution

The first step on Analytical Reasoning questions is getting a system of symbols to represent the possibilities in the game. Unless you're Einstein, and maybe not even then, you are going to need some kind of diagram to answer at least some of the questions in every game. Since the first letters of all of the foods the man bought are all different, just go with G H K L R P S.

Next, you need a diagram to show the different relations (in this case, what items were bought on what days). The same kind of diagram works for just about every kind of LSAT game, fortunately:

Monday | Tuesday | Wednesday


So, we know have three columns. (This is kind of hard to draw in a blog...just imagine the lines extending downward in a table.) Put the symbols into each of them to show the day on which each item was bought. Given what the question told us, we know (the arrow just means "bought before"):

H --> S

So let's fill in the table with that information, and see what happens. By trial and error, we find out that this arrangement obeys all the rules above (they have the Roman numerals in front of them...one the real test they will not, but here I included the numerals to make it easier to read and refer back to)

Monday | Tuesday | Wednesday

H K | S G | L P

Now, we need to go through all the answer choices and just mark off the incorrect ones.

A) Our diagram says H is on Monday, so this is wrong. It obviously can be there, since we did it.

B) Diagram says K is on Monday, so this is wrong.

C) Diagram says G is on Tuesday.

D) Correct.

E) Diagram says P is on Wednesday.

Sometimes, the diagram won't answer eliminate 4 answer choices at first, but only a few, and you'll have several possible answers. In that instance, just retool the diagram using trial and error to make it accord with the rules and eliminate 4 answer choices. Here, we eliminated 4 on the first try, leaving us with one correct answer.

Remember:

1) Symbols are needed for each of the quantities (in this case, the food items bought). Use the first letter of the name of the item...the LSAT writers never seem to make two quantities with the same first letter, in all the tests I've seen.

2) A diagram is needed to show where the quantities go and help us solve the problem. You can either have separate, smaller diagrams for each problem or one big diagram for the whole game. Either way is fine, I think.

3) Don't erase old diagrams. They can be useful in future questions. We didn't encounter that here, of course, since we did just one question, but this is an important thing to remember on test day.

4) Read the rules carefully and be sure to follow them. 1 misread rule can mean several lost points on your LSAT score.

5) Retool your diagram when it doesn't eliminate 4 answer choices.

6) Use trial and error to fill in the diagram. Just try groupings that are within the rules, and see if they help to eliminate more answer choices. You have time to do this, and you'll get faster and faster with more practice. When I started studying for the LSAT, it could take me 20 minutes to do a single game. By test day, I had it down to 4 or 5. This is possible for most anyone with a lot of practice, I think.

7) Rewriting the rules using the symbols (rule i might be written as "LP", for example, to show that they're bought on the same day) is good for some people, and bad for others. Personally, I found it was a waste of time for me, since I ended up rereading the written rules anyway and not looking at my symbols. For other people, the rules being written with symbols is really helpful. Find out what works for you!

Free Sample LSAT Logical Reasoning Question

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


This is the first post in my new LSAT blog, which will cover Analytical Reasoning, Logical Reasoning, and Reading Comprehension. I will post a new question and solution each day.

Please leave comments to ask follow-up/clarification questions, point out another way to solve a given question, request that I solve a certain question, or ask anything about the LSAT.


Question 1, Logical Reasoning:

In addition to the labor and raw materials used to make a house, the reputation of the architect of the house plays a role in determining the price of the house once it is completed. Thus, an expensive house is not always a good house.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) The price of a house should reflect its quality.

B) Price never accurately indicates the quality of a house.

C) An architect's reputation is not always indicative of the quality of the house.

D) The reputation of the architect usually plays a more important role than the quality of the building materials in deciding a home's price.

E) Houses made by less-known architects are usually priced to accurately reflect the quality of the house.

To answer Logical Reasoning questions, you need to understand the way the argument progresses. The main argument in this passage is:

"Price of the house = labor + raw materials + reputation of the architect."

This is just saying that there are three elements that determine the price of the house. From this fact, this passage deduces (the symbol means "not equal to"):

"So, expensive house ≠ good house."

Now that we know what the passage is arguing, we can find out what needs to be assumed in order for that argument to be correct, which is what the question is asking us to do. Pre-phrasing an answer is a great way to avoid wasting time slowly reading through all the answer choices, 4 of which are of course wrong, to find the one right answer.

So, what would need to be assumed to make the argument work? If the architect's good reputation can make the house expensive (since it's one of the three elements that influence the house's price), and expensive doesn't mean good, the architect's good reputation cannot mean it's necessarily a good house. How do we know this is true? Well, if the architect's good reputation did necessarily mean the house is good, the argument's conclusion that "an expensive house is not always a good house" would not follow. So the argument depends on the assumption that an architect's good reputation doesn't necessarily mean that the house is necessarily good.

Which answer choice fits with that pre-phrasing? Choice C does, which says that reputation is not indicative of quality, just like we were saying in our pre-phrasing. Since this is preparation and we have time, though, let's see why the other answers are wrong:

A) This is outside of the scope of the argument. The argument never says anything about what "should" be, whether price "should" be indicative of quality. Instead, it just says that price isn't always indicative of quality.

B) This can't be right because it contradicts the argument's conclusion that "an expensive house is not always a good house." This statement says that an expensive house is never a good house, which is not at all what the argument is saying. The argument says only that an expensive house need not be good, not that it is never good.

C) Correct.

D) Again, beyond the argument's scope. It says only that there are 3 elements that determine the price of the house. The argument does not say which elements, if any, are more important than others.

E) Once more, outside the argument's scope. It does not say anything about lesser-known architects in particular, but rather addresses just the abstract concept of the "reputation" of the architect.

Remember:

1) Find out how the argument progresses, as we did here. Maybe even write out a word or two on your paper, or make a quick flow-chart, to show how the logic works. Logic is the key to this entire test.

2) Pre-phrase the answer (get a rough idea of what a correct answer would be...it need not be written down, necessarily), so you know what to look for in the answer choices.

3) Watch out for answer choices that are beyond the scope of the argument. If the argument does not address it, it isn't the right answer.

4) Watch out for answer choices that contradict the conclusion of the argument. They cannot be assumptions necessary for the argument to make sense, considering that they contradict the argument.

These assumption questions are among the most common in the LSAT Logical Reasoning sections, and since there are 2 of these among the tests 4 graded sections (one is experimental and not graded) and only 1 section each of Analytical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension, it is an important question-type to learn.