LSAT Question Analysis #5

It’s an ugly, rainy, windy day in Washington and all of my lessons are canceled. I’m going to dig into 10 New Actual, Official LSAT PrepTests and do a logic game to pass the time. Let’s try PrepTest 57, Section 1, Questions 1-5 (10 New LSAT, page 188).

This looks like a relatively straightforward ordering game. The items are G, H, J, K, L, and M. I’ll shorthand the rules as follows:

(1) HG
(2) K-G
(3) M-L
(4) JM or MJ

The repetitions of G between rules 1 and 2 and M between rules 3 and 4 are surely not accidental.

Read More

Be the first to comment »

Tags: , , , ,

LSAT Question Analysis #2

Building off the formal logic posts of the last two weeks, today we’re going to discuss the LSAT logic game found at PrepTest 58, Section 3, Questions 7-12 (10 New LSAT, page 241).

This is a fairly simple In-and-Out game (also known as a Selection game). Such games often involve heavy doses of arrow diagramming, and this one is no exception. Take a quick read of the setup and then let’s turn our attention to the rules.

The rules of this game can be diagrammed in straightforward fashion as follows:

1. R→M
2. M→T
3. !S→V
4. !R→L
5. T→(!F and !V)

Let’s turn to the questions now.

Read More

Be the first to comment »

Tags: , , , , , ,

Formal Logic 102: Contrapositives, the Transitive Property, and an LSAT Example

Last time, on Formal Logic:

* We learned that formal logic is an important part of the LSAT.
* Arguments were broken down into propositions, which were shorthanded by capital letters and manipulated using operators.
* Finally, negation and arrow diagrams burst onto the scene, leading to a shocking revelation: A→B says nothing about what happens in the “not A” case!

But what other arrow diagram is equivalent to A→B? How can arrow diagrams be combined? Will we ever finally see an LSAT question example? Does Anthony have his umbrella?

These questions and more will be answered… tonight.

Read More

Be the first to comment »

Tags: , , ,

Formal Logic 101: Propositions, Negation, and Arrow Diagrams

The facts are the least important part of the LSAT.

It’s one of my favorite refrains, because it challenges students to rethink their approaches to the test and create real change in their results. And sure, it’s a slight exaggeration — the facts do matter, at least in some ways — but it’s more true than you might think. A successful approach to the LSAT starts with consideration of logical structure and runs through qualifiers, connecting words, and question types before ever arriving at the sort of fact-based considerations by which too many test takers live and die.

Read More

1 Comment »

Tags: , , ,