LSAT Blog now in Google Search Suggestions / Autocomplete

LSAT Blog Google Search Suggestions AutocompleteA while ago, Google's search suggestions revealed that some of you think the LSAT is bullshit.

I just discovered that you guys have been doing some thinking about me lately. Thanks to you guys and your searches, LSAT Blog is now part of Google's search suggestions, too.

Just type in the word "LSAT," and LSAT Blog now shows up as one of the suggestions.

Type in "the LSAT", LSAT Blog Google Search Suggestions Autocomplete 2and LSAT Blog shows up 2nd.

Here's some info about the other search suggestions, for those who are still searching:

LSAT test dates

LSAT scores

LSAT prep

Can't provide you guys with info about "the last stand," though. Too many things out there with that name. Would love to see a movie or game called "The LSAT Stand," though. It'd probably involve firing conditional arrows at LSAT PrepTests.

Logic and Games

* Looking for a great Valentine's Day gift? Sudan's Military Industry Corporation has small arms for sale. [Sudan MIC via Boing Boing]

* Recording a police officer could get you 15 years in jail. [Gawker]

* Scientific support for doing timed sections and exams, as I recommend in my study schedules. [NYTimes]

* Rep. Dennis Kucinich sues House cafeteria vendor after biting down on sandwich containing unpitted olive. [WSJ]

* Funny email exchange between snowboarding shop and disgruntled customer. [27bslash6]

* Map showing what each state in the U.S. ranks worst in. (Spoiler: Louisiana has the highest rate of gonorrhea infections per capita.) [Pleated Jeans]

* Vegans and PETA members can now enjoy MeatWater without all the animal byproducts. Yes, we live in a world where MeatWater exists. [AOL News]

* Cell phone companies claim that being forced to send alerts when you're about to go over your minutes/data limit would be "compelled speech," violating 1st Amendment rights. [NYTimes]


Preparing for the February 2012 LSAT Experimental Section

LSAT Blog February 2012 LSAT Experimental SectionIn my LSAT study schedules, I recommend that you include extra sections in your practice exams. Why would I recommend such a cruel and difficult task?

Because LSAC uses test-takers as lab rats (like many organizations that administer standardized exams - think back to the SAT). LSAC includes an unscored experimental section on the LSAT and doesn't tell you which one it is. If you knew which one it was, you'd probably take a nap to recuperate between the sections you care about - the scored ones.

To LSAC's credit, this practice increases the validity of the scored sections of future LSATs. The experimental section allows LSAC to pre-test questions with several thousand applicants, helping LSAC determine which questions deserve to make it into future scored sections.

On the other hand, not knowing which section is the experimental can make it difficult to decide whether or not to cancel your score. If you bomb the experimental section, it may affect your performance on the other sections. Additionally, being forced to "donate" 35 minutes of free research for LSAC after paying to take the LSAT hardly seems fair.

Regardless, because you'll see a 5-section exam on test day, rather than the 4 you're used to seeing in your LSAT PrepTests, it's essential to prepare.

I decided to write this post after blog reader Katie wrote to me with the following question:
I have been taking 4 section timed tests for a while now but am starting to take 5 and 6 section timed tests as you suggest. I have two questions:

1. I assume that the type of "extra" section(s) I include should vary from test to test. For example, on one day, I would add a logic games section and the next day either a reading comprehension or a logical reasoning section. Is this what you would recommend?

2. What is the best way to score these tests? Which section do I omit? I took a test last night and did an extra logical reasoning section. The scoring for the test I took the extra section from was very different from the full test I was taking - does this make sense? I want to make sure I'm getting an accurate read of my performance.

Varying extra sections
There are two main approaches I'd recommend:

-You can rotate the type of "extra" section(s) that you use.
-You can make the extra section(s) the one that you like the least.

For most people, a combination of the two is probably ideal. Figure out which type of section you dread the most, and include it more often than the others.


Which section to omit
This makes perfect sense, Katie. To get the most accurate score reading, omit the section(s) that are not from the original exam. Different exams have different scales.


Some more tips on preparing for the experimental section:

Where to place the unscored section.
In the past, I recommended that you place the experimental sections in the first 3 sections out of the 5 that you complete for your practice exams. That's where the experimental had traditionally fallen on test day. Until recently, test-takers reported that it had always been one of the first 3 sections.

However, on the October 2011 LSAT, many test-takers reported having the experimental as their 4th section on Test Day - for this reason, I recommend that you also include it as the 4th or 5th section in at least a few practice exams, just in case.

It's unfortunate that you may have to take the unscored section when you're less fatigued, but just remember everyone else is affected in the same way.

Mix up sections.
As I said earlier, on test day, you won't know which section is the experimental. For this reason, you may want to lay out the sections from each PrepTest beforehand. Take two from the "scored" exam and one "unscored" experimental, and mix them together.

This way, you won't know which ones are scored and which ones aren't, and you'll be forced to put the same effort into each.

Photo by happysteve

Sudoku Puzzles for LSAT Prep


"Why sudoku? What does that have to do with the LSAT?"

Many of you have been asking me for a good long-term way to prepare for the Logic Games section without getting into the actual LSAT material.

And solving a sudoku puzzle requires a little something nerds call, "deductive reasoning."

Basically - making inferences!

Sound familiar? It's the exact same thing you have to do in LSAT Logic Games, so sudoku's a great tool for developing the skills you need.

So I've put together a book of 208 sudoku puzzles, along with a brief introduction to sudoku - LSAT Blog's Sudoku Puzzles for LSAT Prep.


LSAT Blog's Sudoku Puzzles for LSAT Prep

The puzzles are placed in order of increasing difficulty, and I've included the answers at the very end so that you can check your work or sneak a peek.

You can have this on your computer within minutes, and, best of all, print out as many copies as you need.

You can print and carry a few of them with you, rather than having to carry the entire book. You can also print out multiple copies of the same puzzle so that you can do and redo them without having to erase.


But why are there TWO books in the photo?

Because I partnered with a famous sudoku-writer, DJAPE, to put together another one.


These sudoku books are for you:

if you plan to take the LSAT down the road and want to get an early start on your prep 

if you don't want to expose yourself to the limited number of real LSAT Logic Games out there

if you just want to take a break from the LSAT without completely wasting your time on social media and Netflix


Get both books (208 regular sudoku and DJAPE's book) for only $17.94:

CC



Get your copy of DJAPE's book for only $9.97:

CC



Get your copy of the 208 regular sudoku book for only $7.97:


CC



Fun Fact:

This is a PDF available for instant download. It'll be sent to whichever email address you submit.


P.S. The 208 regular sudoku book when paired with the book of sudoku variants by DJAPE is a lethal combination.








February 2011 LSAT vs. June 2011 LSAT

LSAT Blog February 2011 LSAT June 2011 LSATLaw schools consider applications on a rolling admissions basis. The earlier you apply in the admissions cycle, the easier it is to gain acceptance. The cycle begins in September.

For top law schools, it's especially important to apply early in the cycle because admission to these schools is particularly competitive.

February is towards the end of the cycle. Many top law schools (such as Columbia, Harvard, NYU, and Stanford) don't even accept February LSAT scores for that cycle.

(This means you can't take the February 2011 LSAT and apply to start at those law schools in the fall of 2011. However, you can take the February 2011 LSAT and use that score to apply to start at those law schools in Fall 2012.)

Even some law schools that aren't typically considered "top law schools" have application deadlines that are before February LSAT scores are released. This means, of course, those schools don't take February LSAT scores (for that cycle), either.

Given enough prep time (and the right kind of prep), most people are capable of scoring decently on the LSAT. However, a month or two generally isn't enough time to adequately prepare.

If you're not feeling ready for the LSAT now, you'll likely do better on the LSAT if you wait. Taking it in June or October will give you enough time to work through some version of my LSAT study schedules. You've probably started working through some of the materials mentioned there for February, but perhaps you haven't gotten past Logic Games - there's still Logical Reasoning, Reading Comprehension, and several recent full-length practice exams that you should complete before taking the exam. It simply can't all be done in a couple of weeks.

Some top law schools (such as Columbia and NYU) take the average of multiple scores, rather than only the highest. Fordham does not disclose whether it takes the average of multiple scores.

Even if the law schools you're considering explicitly state that they take the highest LSAT score (and most do only take the highest when computing your LSAT and GPA), they'll still see your other scores. Ideally, you'll only take the LSAT once and get it right the first time.Try not to take the LSAT until you're as certain as possible that you're fully prepared.

Bottom line: if you're not feeling ready to take it in February, I recommend you bite the bullet and wait a year to begin law school, and take the LSAT in June rather than in February. A higher LSAT score means you'll get into better law schools and/or, potentially, more scholarship money. 1 year could be well worth the wait.

If you're only shooting for less competitive schools, it won't matter as much. However, for most people, it's not worth going to less competitive (i.e. 4th-tier) law schools at all.

Photo by lifeontheedge

December 2010 LSAT Score Release Comic Strip

LSAT Blog reader Schopenhauer already brought us a hilarious comic strip about his experience taking the December 2010 LSAT.

He's back with another one. This time, it's about the experience of waiting for his LSAT score and finally getting it back.

Please thank him in the comments for applying his artistic abilities and humor to the topic we all care so deeply about, the LSAT.

Click each of the below images to enlarge, or click each of these 8 links (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).

December 2010 LSAT Score Release Comic Strip










December 2010 LSAT Score Release Comic Strip






December 2010 LSAT Score Release Comic Strip






December 2010 LSAT Score Release Comic Strip






December 2010 LSAT Score Release Comic Strip






December 2010 LSAT Score Release Comic Strip






December 2010 LSAT Score Release Comic Strip






December 2010 LSAT Score Release Comic Strip


LSAT Diary: LSAT Success Story and Tips

LSAT Success Story TipsThis installment of LSAT Diaries comes from Jared, who scored a 164 on the December LSAT, improving over 20 points from his original LSAT score!

He's got some great LSAT advice for you about how he did it.

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Thanks to Jared for sharing his experience and advice, and please leave your questions for him below in the comments!

Jared's LSAT Diary:

When I first began my LSAT quest I was, like many law school hopefuls, overwhelmed with the immense quantity of LSAT prep books. I assumed from the beginning that not all LSAT prep materials were created equally—but with each prep company boasting insane promises and drastic score-improvement-testimonials on their covers (oh, how I would have analyzed these claims if my pre-LSAT logic skills would have been what they are now), choosing prep material was a stormy sea to navigate.

I talked to the book salesman (he seemed credible), and he recommended the Kaplan LSAT book (“It does guarantee higher scores. Any book with that kind of guarantee must be worth the investment,” he said), and I walked home thinking that this exam couldn’t be so bad, that Kaplan would unlock the secrets of the exam, that all it would take was this book and a few practice exams before I’d be ready to slay the real thing.

I’ve grown up a lot since then.

Kaplan bolstered my confidence to such an insane degree that I couldn’t help but feel like the difficulty of the LSAT was overly exaggerated. For assumption questions, “you simply have to find the missing link,” logic games are merely “a matter of following rules,” using grids with Xs and checkmarks is “the best way to diagram a matching game,” reading comprehension is easy “because the answers are all in the passage.”

Words like simple, simply, easy, and the like permeated the prep book, and I felt my confidence inflate every time I read them. I never took a cold test because I wasn’t interested in a score that reflected total unfamiliarity with the LSAT. I finished working through my Kaplan book at the end of June, picked up the most recent prep-test I could find early July, set aside a Saturday morning and prepared to annihilate the LSAT.

I scored a 152. Confession: I cheated. Lots. I gave myself extra time, looked at the answers when I had narrowed my choices down to two, bubbling in the right one saying, “I would have chosen that answer anyway.” I actually gave up during the second LG. I stopped my timer and walked out of my room utterly defeated. I came back to finish it, scoring 9/23 on the section. I’d put my actual performance in the low 140s (when I went back to it for the sake of comparison, I couldn’t remember how many questions I’d cheated on, but I know it was a lot. I flipped through my Kaplan book, wondering how I could have done so poorly despite my diligent studying.

At that point, I almost gave up on the LSAT completely. Then I found LSAT Blog (no, Steve doesn’t pay us to write these remarks, nor does he request that we shamelessly promote him as a tutor/free advice giver.) I read every article, every prep book review and made a list of the materials I would need. I cleared my schedule, preparing to start over from square one.

Fact: any prep book that attempts to inflate confidence by underestimating the difficulty of the LSAT probably isn’t worth your while. It’s best to have a realistic understanding of the LSAT, knowing that some of the questions are brutally difficult, and understanding that there is no ‘one size fits all’ approach to the questions/individual question types. There is variance between question types (one Principle question might require a different approach than the next) and you must have an adaptable approach to them.

Tip about games for those overwhelmed by them: Don’t worry about inferences at the beginning. I remember wondering, how did they make this deduction? Don’t try to grasp all of the subtle nuances of the logic games section right away. First work on the fundamentals: the rules, the action, and the variables. Familiarity will reveal patterns and as you get more comfortable with how rules work, the ability to make deductions will increase.

After working through logic games, I took another prep-test and scored an almost legit 153 (no cheating except for an extra minute here or there). Performance on logic games increased, logical reasoning and reading comprehension were the same. Seeing as logical reasoning comprises half the test, I tackled it next. This section took a long time to figure out for me to ‘get,’ so I’ll detail some of the general mistakes I was making and how I fixed them:

Mistakes: under immense time pressure, I’d jump straight to the answers after reading the stimulus and question without taking time to actually analyze the stimulus. I’d analyze the stimulus through the answer choices, wasting valuable time in the process. I diagrammed too much, and I was extremely rigid in my techniques. I didn’t separate premise/evidence from conclusion, and I consistently took the whole stimulus at face value. My advice to you is basically to do the opposite of these things. Know what the stimulus is saying before you look at the answer choices, only diagram when absolutely necessary, adapt your approach accordingly, etc.

Even so, my performance on logical reasoning improved to -5 to -7—up from the -11 before I’d started. My scores at this point (around mid-September) were consistently in the mid-150s. I stopped working on logical reasoning after reading somewhere that every LSAT taker has a ceiling, and it’s around 10 points higher than your diagnostic score. When progress seems to halt, you’ve hit yours.

I emailed Steve about this, telling him my target score. I’ll sum up the conversation like this: you get out of the LSAT what you put into it. Diligence and a high level of commitment are the keys to success on the LSAT. Steve advised me to look at ALL of the logical reasoning questions I’d gotten wrong and to analyze the ‘why’ behind each wrong/right answer choice. I did this for every wrong answer I’d gotten in the logical reasoning section, looking for patterns, and identifying areas of weakness: Assumption, Principle, and Flaw questions were mine. Know yours and drill them. My scores skyrocketed up to the high 160s and into the hallowed realm of the coveted 170+ after this conversation with no cheating (I’d leave the answer sheets at home and write at the library), no extra time, etc.

I enlisted Steve as a tutor, and together we worked on my logical reasoning problem areas. Steve helped me to finally realize the difference between Must Be True and Most Strongly Supported questions, how to approach a Sufficient Assumption vs. a Necessary Assumption, etc. That was time well invested.

The week leading up to the December LSAT was pretty rough. I had a migraine on Wednesday and was pretty delirious for most of the next day. I was exhausted on Friday, and was pretty nervous about how my health would impact my performance. But nothing was going to stop me from writing that exam, nothing. I was extremely nervous during the first half of the LSAT (not to mention exhausted from being sick during the week), but came back after the break and vandalized some stained glass windows and absolutely crushed the last LR section. I can’t say the same for my writing sample though, but maybe I’m just being too hard on myself.

I’m pleased to say that I scored a 164—that’s lower than my average on my last batch of practice exams, but somewhere between 20-24 points higher than my first practice LSAT (it’s hard to know exactly what my score would have been on my first practice LSAT with the cheating and dramatic leaving).

So here I am, contemplating a re-write, knowing full well that I could have performed better. And yet, as I write this diary, I can’t help feeling entirely satisfied with the knowledge that the work I put into the LSAT actually paid off.

Photo by bdorfman

Logic and Games

* The # of 1st-time LSAT-takers in December 2010 was down 22% from last December. Guess that leaves more LSAT for the rest of us. [Law Professors Blog; LSAC]

* What did previous LSAT-takers wish they'd known before starting their prep? [LSAT Blog]

* Sophomore pays his college tuition with $1 bills. [NYTimes]

* Antonin Scalia is apparently the Supreme Court's funniest justice. [ABA Journal]

* Woman uses Craigslist and MySpace to track down thief. [Salon]

* The new Miss America wants to go to law school and become President one day. [Above The Law; Jezebel]

* Alabama's new governor wants everyone to become a Christian. [Gawker]

Preparing for the LSAT Experimental Section

Preparing LSAT Experimental Section
In my LSAT study schedules, I recommend that you include extra sections in your practice exams. Why would I recommend such a cruel and difficult task?

Because LSAC uses test-takers as lab rats (like many organizations that administer standardized exams - think back to the SAT). LSAC includes an unscored experimental section on the LSAT and doesn't tell you which one it is. If you knew which one it was, you'd probably take a nap to recuperate between the sections you care about - the scored ones.

To LSAC's credit, this practice increases the validity of the scored sections of future LSATs. The experimental section allows LSAC to pre-test questions with several thousand applicants, helping LSAC determine which questions deserve to make it into future scored sections.

On the other hand, not knowing which section is the experimental can make it difficult to decide whether or not to cancel your score. If you bomb the experimental section, it may affect your performance on the other sections. Additionally, being forced to "donate" 35 minutes of free research for LSAC after paying to take the LSAT hardly seems fair.

Regardless, because you'll see a 5-section exam on test day, rather than the 4 you're used to seeing in your books of PrepTests, it's essential to prepare.

I decided to write this post after blog reader Katie wrote to me with the following question:
I have been taking 4 section timed tests for a while now but am starting to take 5 and 6 section timed tests as you suggest. I have two questions:

1. I assume that the type of "extra" section(s) I include should vary from test to test. For example, on one day, I would add a logic games section and the next day either a reading comprehension or a logical reasoning section. Is this what you would recommend?

2. What is the best way to score these tests? Which section do I omit? I took a test last night and did an extra logical reasoning section. The scoring for the test I took the extra section from was very different from the full test I was taking - does this make sense? I want to make sure I'm getting an accurate read of my performance.

Varying extra sections
There are two main approaches I'd recommend:

-You can rotate the type of "extra" section(s) that you use.
-You can make the extra section(s) the one that you like the least.

For most people, a combination of the two is probably ideal. Figure out which type of section you dread the most, and include it more often than the others.


Which section to omit
This makes perfect sense, Katie. To get the most accurate score reading, omit the section(s) that are not from the original exam. Different exams have different scales.


Some more tips on preparing for the experimental section:

Where to place the unscored section.
LSAC used to only place experimental sections in the first 3, but they've changed things in recent years, and it can now be ANY of the sections.

It's unfortunate that you might have to take the unscored section earlier, when you're less tired, but just remember everyone else is affected in the same way.


Mix up sections.
As I said earlier, on test day, you won't know which section is the experimental. For this reason, you may want to lay out the sections from each PrepTest beforehand. Take the four from the "scored" exam and one "unscored" experimental, and mix them together.

This way, you won't know which ones are scored and which ones aren't, and you'll be forced to put the same effort into each.


LSAT Diary: Deciding Whether To Go To Law School

LSAT Blog Decide Go Law School
If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Please comment and give Jeysa some advice as she decides between pursuing a PhD in Clinical Psych and a JD.

Jeysa's LSAT Diary:

Unlike my initial LSAT Diary, I intend to include a bit about how I am holding up as far as the study process, but I also want to pose some “deep thinking questions” (as they say) and hopefully get some feedback!

As I prepared for the LSAT, as many of you, every single section improved – BUT logic games. With this, I knew it was high time to buckle down. The great combination of LSAT Blog posts, tireless studying, and practice, (and actually further reading for fun helped to boost stamina and a new way of thinking as well), my logic games performance went from -20 (2o wrong), to -18, to -14, to -11. Hopefully it continues to progress, in turn, as well. On another note, I think that this downward slope will make a lovely graph. I am thinking of plotting it as we speak.

I can honestly say that I am pretty confident regarding logical reasoning sections (gives herself a pat on the back). However, I find myself having to keep myself from dozing off with boredom at times, for the section involving reading comprehension. (It can be so long!) I have found that taking multiple heavy reading sections at once to increase endurance is truly the key this relatively early in the game.

Over the past few weeks, and as the fall semester came to a close, I spent a lot of time thinking about my decision to go into law. I feel that far too many people embark on law school “just because they are not sure what else to do.” I have been debating between a PhD in Clinical Psych and a JD, of course. I'm questioning my ability to succeed and put in the hard work once I take the LSAT’s and enter law school. I know that I have an immensely strong work ethic, but what precisely will allow me to stand out in the crowd? Luck?

I only wish that everyone in my personal life was as strongly motivated. Their law-chasing-dreams seem impulsive and not well thought out. I would love to hear feedback on why you chose the legal field, and why you think you will be able to stand out, and succeed. What makes a good lawyer? These are the questions I am asking myself.

Photo by archeon

Logic and Games

* Must-read NYT article about law school, job prospects, and debt, and some responses to it. [NYTimes; AboveTheLaw; WSJ; Atlantic; Chronicle of Higher Ed]

* I'm quoted in this article about the rankings' influence on law school selection. [US News]

* US News might start ranking 3rd-tier law schools. [ABA Journal]

* ABA might stop requiring law schools to use LSAT, but most would probably still use it anyway. [Inside Higher Ed]

* Great parody of The Paper Chase, a classic law school movie. [YouTube]

* Stand-up comedian Hannibal Buress makes an assumption about apple juice. [YouTube]



Informal Logic: Deductive Reasoning

Informal logic is a big part of the LSAT.

Professor Walker White, who teaches Computer Science at Cornell University, has graciously agreed to share some of his tips on understanding informal logic with everyone reading LSAT Blog.

His discussion includes detailed analysis of a real LSAT Logic Game. I've made a few of the other examples "LSAT Blog"-specific. The first part's below, and the second is Informal Logic: Deduction and Arguments.

Please thank Professor White in the comments for sharing these great articles!


Part 1: Deductive Reasoning

An argument that relies only on deduction is guaranteed to be valid. For example, a deductive argument might consist of two premises of the form:
  1. If P is true, then Q is true.
  2. P is true.
Deduction allows us to conclude from these two premises that:
  1. Q is true.
For example, suppose we use a Google search to demonstrate that LSAT Blog has no articles on ladies footwear. In this case, we are making deduction with two premises:
  1. If Google returns no LSAT Blog articles for "LSAT Blog ladies footwear," then LSAT Blog has no articles on ladies footwear.
  2. Google returns no LSAT Blog articles for "LSAT Blog ladies footwear."
From these premises, it is valid to conclude that LSAT Blog has no articles on ladies footwear. Again, this does not mean the claim is true. Premise (1) is a complicated premise, and depends on the reliability of Google. But if Google is not reliable, then our debate is about that premise, and not the conclusion.
Students of informal logic sometimes try to split claim (1) into a premise and a conclusion. However, if-then statements are typically a single claim about a relationship between two observations. In this case, premise (1) is a claim about how reliable Google is for finding LSAT Blog articles. One way to think about this is the difference between the following two statements:
  • If Google cannot find an article, then it must not exist.
  • Because Google cannot find the article, it must not exist.
The first is a single claim about the reliability of Google. The second is an argument where we assert that a Google search has failed, and use this as evidence of the article's absence. In fact, this argument uses the first claim as an unspoken premise.

Deduction works "by definition" (and the principle of identity). When we make a claim like "if P is true, then Q is true," we mean that given argument P is true, this argument also shows Q is true. Given this observation, it does not appear that our deduction is particularly useful. We wanted to prove that LSAT Blog has no articles on ladies footwear, but to do so, we introduced a more complicated premise about Google's reliability. In the case of Google, we may be willing to accept this particular premise on faith. However in general, unless we know how to deduce or evaluate a conditional statement like (1), we are again back where we started.

Fortunately, we can deduce new conditionals as conclusions, provided that we have other conditionals as premises. To deduce a new conditional, we start first with a new premise. This new premise is introduced "for the sake of argument"—we are not making any claims about whether it is true or false. We use the existing conditionals to deduce a new conclusion. If we do this, then the conditional that connects the initial premise with the conclusion is itself a valid conclusion of the existing conditionals.
This explanation confuses even me, so it is best to proceed with an example.

See the rules of the second Logic Game in PrepTest 20 (the October 1996 LSAT), excerpted in Logic Made Easy.

Suppose, in that game, we want to deduce the new conditional statement:

If P is cut, then R is cut.
We start by assuming, "for the sake of argument," that P is cut. Deducing from premise (4), we know that L is not cut. Additionally, premise (5) is actually shorthand for a bunch of conditionals, one of which is "if L is not cut, then M and R are cut." Hence we can deduce that both M and R are cut. We started assuming that P is cut and sequence of deductions provided us with the conclusion that R is cut. That means, from premises (1)-(4), we can deduce the conditional "if P is cut, then R is cut."

From this example, we see that conditionals are a form of hedging our bets. We can have a perfectly valid argument about the consequences of cutting area P without committing to the claim that P is actually going to be cut. It is possible that P is the pet project of the university president and will never be cut, but that does not make our argument invalid. Hence, deductive arguments are another excellent example why we must separate truth from validity.

***

Read on for Part 2: Informal Logic: Deduction and Arguments.