Top Law Schools

When you are answering a logical reasoning question, you know that you have the correct answer based on the facts and situation that were given. Then when you go and check the answer, it is another choice that does not even follow the basic logic behind the given situation. I understand that you are not to make assumptions and that selecting the "best" answer is required, however, it seems that on some of these questions the correct answer is not the best.

If you refer us to the question you mean to indicate and describe your method of reasoning, I'm sure many posters will be willing to explain to you why you're wrong.

mallard wrote:If you refer us to the question you mean to indicate and describe your method of reasoning, I'm sure many posters will be willing to explain to you why you're wrong.

I will post in a second.

Yeah, I do think that sometimes, and I get frustrated at first. However, after reviewing it, I usually understand why I'm wrong and the correct answer is right.

The question is in 10 actual, official page 335.

It states that a cat wont be affectionate unless it was held as a kitten.

The answer i chose that most resembles is a) tulips wont produce flowers unless it was chilled. The book said that the answer was grass seeds will not germinate well.

NJcollegestudent wrote:The question is in 10 actual, official page 335.

It states that a cat wont be affectionate unless it was held as a kitten.

The answer i chose that most resembles is a) tulips wont produce flowers unless it was chilled. The book said that the answer was grass seeds will not germinate well.

I had narrowed it down to a and e, so part of my frustration is that i got it wrong, however, i cannot fathom why e was better than a.

I'm looking at 10 Actual right now (the green one), page 335, and it's RC. No sign of a cat question.

NJcollegestudent wrote:

NJcollegestudent wrote:The question is in 10 actual, official page 335.

It states that a cat wont be affectionate unless it was held as a kitten.

The answer i chose that most resembles is a) tulips wont produce flowers unless it was chilled. The book said that the answer was grass seeds will not germinate well.

I had narrowed it down to a and e, so part of my frustration is that i got it wrong, however, i cannot fathom why e was better than a.

Because in e you have a old won't ____ unless young analogy going and in a you don't?

TLS1776 wrote:I'm looking at 10 Actual right now (the green one), page 335, and it's RC. No sign of a cat question.

It was in pretest 18. I have the book with the green cover with a blue bottom.

Tautology wrote:

NJcollegestudent wrote:

NJcollegestudent wrote:The question is in 10 actual, official page 335.

It states that a cat wont be affectionate unless it was held as a kitten.

The answer i chose that most resembles is a) tulips wont produce flowers unless it was chilled. The book said that the answer was grass seeds will not germinate well.

I had narrowed it down to a and e, so part of my frustration is that i got it wrong, however, i cannot fathom why e was better than a.

Because in e you have a old won't ____ unless young analogy going and in a you don't.

I see your reasoning now. What threw me off was that in a you did have a slight aging parallel, as it stated the tulip blubs that were chilled two months in advance would create flowers.

Both E and the stimulus are affirming the consequent. E is the only one doing that out of the 5 choices.

PF ==> CM
CM
Therefore PF


GW ==> FG
FG
Therefore GW

Remember unless means if not

Answer choice A is actually doing Modus Ponens, it's logically sound.

The question in question is P18-S4-Q3, page 343 of 10 Actual.

The flawed reasoning in the stimulus is as follows:
Premise 1: ~H --> ~A
Premise 2: H
Conclusion: A

Premise 1 can be redrawn as A-->H, in which case the flaw becomes clear. H is necessary for A but is not sufficient for A.

Answer choice A has the following reasoning:
Premise 1: ~C-->~P
Premise 2: ~C
Conclusion: ~P

This is different from the stimulus. In fact, it's a valid argument; it isn't flawed.

One answer choice might make the most sense using real-word, outside information and assumptions, but when you only consider the given information to be the only "truths" you consider, there is only one correct answer choice.

NJcollegestudent wrote:I see your reasoning now. What threw me off was that in a you did have a slight aging parallel, as it stated the tulip blubs that were chilled two months in advance would create flowers.

Parallel subject matter/aspects does not equal parallel reasoning. LSAC plants answer choices like this to try to throw you off.

Its good that im narrowing down the two correct answers in a cold, diagnostic without practice though. If i could not narrow it down then id be in trouble, and now its just recognizing the subtle flaws in the answers. I wonder who writes the LSAT, probably someone with a mind that constantly thinks in riddle and take the long twisting road to get from a to b, rather than the main path.

cinefile 17 wrote:

NJcollegestudent wrote:I see your reasoning now. What threw me off was that in a you did have a slight aging parallel, as it stated the tulip blubs that were chilled two months in advance would create flowers.

Parallel subject matter/aspects does not equal parallel reasoning. LSAC plants answer choices like this to try to throw you off.

This is true, I suppose I should have just let someone with the actual question answer.

NJcollegestudent wrote:Its good that im narrowing down the two correct answers in a cold, diagnostic without practice though. If i could not narrow it down then id be in trouble, and now its just recognizing the subtle flaws in the answers. I wonder who writes the LSAT, probably someone with a mind that constantly thinks in riddle and take the long twisting road to get from a to b, rather than the main path.

I had the same problem, and realized I kept narrowing down to the correct answer and the "second best" answer. Once I learned what the "second best" choice looked like for each question stem, I was then able to easily select the correct answer.

NJcollegestudent wrote:Its good that im narrowing down the two correct answers in a cold, diagnostic without practice though. If i could not narrow it down then id be in trouble, and now its just recognizing the subtle flaws in the answers. I wonder who writes the LSAT, probably someone with a mind that constantly thinks in riddle and take the long twisting road to get from a to b, rather than the main path.

That train of thought won't get you a competitive score, there is no "second best", that's what LSAC wants you to think, there is only one right answer and four wrong answers. If keep thinking there is a "best" answer and a "second best" it might lower your confidence when you encounter tougher questions.

blackwater88 wrote:

NJcollegestudent wrote:Its good that im narrowing down the two correct answers in a cold, diagnostic without practice though. If i could not narrow it down then id be in trouble, and now its just recognizing the subtle flaws in the answers. I wonder who writes the LSAT, probably someone with a mind that constantly thinks in riddle and take the long twisting road to get from a to b, rather than the main path.

That train of thought won't get you a competitive score, there is no "second best", that's what LSAC wants you to think, there is only one right answer and four wrong answers. If keep thinking there is a "best" answer and a "second best" it might lower your confidence when you encounter tougher questions.

In LR, this is actually incorrect. Generally, there *is* a "second best" selection.

For instance, in a "must also be true" question, three of the answers typically would be very clearly incorrect, one is either a contrapositive or syllogism (the correct answer), and one is a typically a restatement of one of the premises (second best choice).

cdunn wrote:

blackwater88 wrote:

NJcollegestudent wrote:Its good that im narrowing down the two correct answers in a cold, diagnostic without practice though. If i could not narrow it down then id be in trouble, and now its just recognizing the subtle flaws in the answers. I wonder who writes the LSAT, probably someone with a mind that constantly thinks in riddle and take the long twisting road to get from a to b, rather than the main path.

That train of thought won't get you a competitive score, there is no "second best", that's what LSAC wants you to think, there is only one right answer and four wrong answers. If keep thinking there is a "best" answer and a "second best" it might lower your confidence when you encounter tougher questions.

In LR, this is actually incorrect. Generally, there *is* a "second best" selection.

For instance, in a "must also be true" question, three of the answers typically would be very clearly incorrect, one is either a contrapositive or syllogism (the correct answer), and one is a typically a restatement of one of the premises (second best choice).

I don't know, I still think there's no second best. Wrong is wrong.

Besides, in a Must Be True question, an exact re-statement of the stimulus would be TRUE. If the syllabus is says, "if there's rain then there's clouds" (if A then B) and an answer choice says, "If it's raining then there's clouds" (if A then B) then it MUST BE TRUE and therefore would be the correct answer. No???

cdunn wrote:

blackwater88 wrote:

NJcollegestudent wrote:Its good that im narrowing down the two correct answers in a cold, diagnostic without practice though. If i could not narrow it down then id be in trouble, and now its just recognizing the subtle flaws in the answers. I wonder who writes the LSAT, probably someone with a mind that constantly thinks in riddle and take the long twisting road to get from a to b, rather than the main path.

That train of thought won't get you a competitive score, there is no "second best", that's what LSAC wants you to think, there is only one right answer and four wrong answers. If keep thinking there is a "best" answer and a "second best" it might lower your confidence when you encounter tougher questions.

In LR, this is actually incorrect. Generally, there *is* a "second best" selection.

For instance, in a "must also be true" question, three of the answers typically would be very clearly incorrect, one is either a contrapositive or syllogism (the correct answer), and one is a typically a restatement of one of the premises (second best choice).

No it's not, it's still an incorrect answer. At least for me, looking at the answer choices as four being wrong and one correct really helped me improve my scoring. Again, if you attack a question with the presupposition that an answer might trick you it probably will. Like the example the OP gave, all the four other answers were wrong, I'm willing to bet if he had attacked the question with the idea that one is clearly wrong and the other clearly wrong he wouldn't have gotten confused.

cinefile 17 wrote:Besides, in a Must Be True question, an exact re-statement of the stimulus would be TRUE. If the syllabus is says, "if there's rain then there's clouds" (if A then B) and an answer choice says, "If it's raining then there's clouds" (if A then B) then it MUST BE TRUE and therefore would be the correct answer. No???

Right. For "must be true" or inference questions, a repeated or paraphrased statement will absolutely be the correct answer. There's no real second-best answer on these questions, the four incorrect answer choices are incorrect because they're not supported by the answer choices. I think you can sorta make the argument that for strengthen and weaken questions, there is occasionally an answer choice that strengthens the conclusion very slightly, but that works only if you start making extra assumptions, which is a bad move in my opinion.

I always think of LR questions as having one perfect answer and four answers with some fatal flaw. Sometimes that fatal flaw is just that it requires an unwarranted assumption, but it's still fatal.

NJcollegestudent wrote:When you are answering a logical reasoning question, you know that you have the correct answer based on the facts and situation that were given. Then when you go and check the answer, it is another choice that does not even follow the basic logic behind the given situation. I understand that you are not to make assumptions and that selecting the "best" answer is required, however, it seems that on some of these questions the correct answer is not the best.

I had trouble with this initially and so do most LSAT test takers. The correct answer will be something off the wall whereas there will be an enticing wrong answer with a very miniscule flaw. The trick is to look for reasons why answers are wrong instead of simply trying to select the right answer. You might think, oh sh-- that sucks because it is like doing more work... however, you will find that you actually save a lot of time. There are only a handful of logical flaws, most of which repeat themselves. One super helpful text, as most people will probably agree, is the Kaplan Mastery Practice. I would suggest perusing through a Logical Reasoning Bible in a bookstore for a day (like a whole day) for a little more background, but wouldn't suggest buying that. Then just work through Mastery Practice, take practice tests, time yourself conservatively (start of giving yourself extra time, but keep restricting yourself on the timing until you force yourself to finish several minutes ahead of 35 minutes), review what you are missing (do only about 5 questions at a time then break to check then continue repeat... on most practices... that way it is still fresh in your mind and you can analyze why you missed it). Logical reasoning is so repetitive that if you just take the time you will do well if not phenomenal.

Note: The LR sections saved me... I only missed one question on the two LR sections jettisoning me to a 174 on what was honestly a bad day for me mentally... headache, worn down from work, and overly nervous. Good luck!