Top Law Schools

Hello,
I am doing some Type 5 (Parallel Reasoning) questions. These are the ones that ask you to identify the reasoning most similar to the stimulus in the answer choices. Anyway, I am attending a TestMasters class and using the Powerscore LRB. I am not missing THAT many of these question types (although missing even one is too many) but I am looking for some help.

I was wondering if anyone has perhaps come up with their own way of doing these that they would be willing to share? I have gone through the section in the LRB and I don't really like their method (or maybe I just don't understand it). Lining up the premises/conclusion doesn't always work; however, the one thing I do like is making a general statement of what happened and seeing if the prephrase fits an answer choice but that doesn't always fit either (and it can eat time).

Anyway, any and all help/advice is appreciated. Thanks in advance!

I try to strip them down to their base logic. Almost all, but not all, they will be standard logical arguments. EX. A-->B, B-->C,-->D, therefore for A-->D. Some form of that with "ands' or "ors". Conversely, the flaws will be illogical statements. So, what I do is try to mentally strip them down to that. After, every sentence quickly assess their logical relationship and construct and relate them to the next sentence. When you understand the logical construct of the argument, then you will automatically will be able to quickly rule out answers which dont meet them, saving you valuable time. Good luck!

Sorry for the poor writing, I am at work and quickly tried to respond.

References also, such as a small tank in one question and a large fly in another are flawed because of size, I seem to remember something from a bible about this.

Yes, the other form of reasoning is more abstract predicated on word usage in additon to or in absence of formal logic.

I'm also having trouble with these. I think it's in part because I don't want to take as much time as is necessary to do them while I'm just drilling... not a good habit, I know--- but I intend to start always coming back to them with the excess time I have.

I also just started immediately diagramming them in abstract forms, I found that helpful too.

i like to look at the language of the conclusion after reading the stimulus. words such as must, probably, and/or, etc can help you eliminate answer choices fast. for example, if the conclusion states something MUST happen. if any of the of the answer choices have words like probably, likely, etc in the conclusion they should be elminated. the language tells you whether the author is being vauge or narrow. im pretty sure this can be found in the LRB.

also in the structure of the stimulus, if the author is using quantifying works like all, most or some then the answer choices should parallel those words.

hope this helps. good luck.