Help on the LR Section Forum

[sirphillup]

First things first, I must say that I am rather new to the whole LSAT prep thing. (I was reviewing lightly earlier this summer, but had to stop studying because I was scheduled to take the GRE). I have read through the Logical Reasoning Bible and am going through the Logic Games (which I seem to be pretty good at, but I am not yet finished with all four game types, so I won't speak too soon). I also score pretty well on the RC. I never miss more than four questions (timed) and they are usually silly mistakes. I am not too worried about that section, given that I am not having any serious comprehension issues.

My Logical Reasoning scores, however, are usually pretty abysmal. Sometimes I get lucky and score a 22 or above, but most of the time I miss around 7 questions on each section

I do not think that I have any serious issues comprehending the concepts being tested on the LSAT. I do find, though, that I am generally missing the same kinds of questions--Flaw in Reasoning, Parallel/Parallel Flaw, Weakening, Assumption, and occasionally a MBT--when I am under time constraints. Pretty much what is happening is this: I have gotten pretty good at spotting the three "loser" answers, which means that I naturally end up between two contenders. I am finding that most of the time, while reviewing the section, I see exactly what I am doing wrong fairly quickly. However, even though I understand the mistake, I keep making the same stupid errors during timed practice.

Do any of you have any good strategies for the question types above? What works for you? What do you avoid, etc? That kind of thing. Also, how do I approach those questions on which I am eliminating three answers and keeping two?

I would appreciate any help

[incompetentia]

Saw this tip a few days ago and thought it was great: Remember that one of your answers of the two is wrong. Focus on trying to negate the two answers - one should pop out immediately.

If you've already isolated question types that you're having trouble with, you're off to a good start. You should try a couple different approaches with each type, as something that might work for one might not work for another.

Since LG seems to be a strong point for you, you may consider trying out diagramming for a question type or two - I ended up diagramming most assumption questions to reinforce what I needed to be looking for. As with anything you try, though, don't overdo it.

[TMC116]

Saw this tip a few days ago and thought it was great: Remember that one of your answers of the two is wrong. Focus on trying to negate the two answers - one should pop out immediately. .

What do you mean by "focus on trying to negate the two answers"? (I assume you're talking about all questions here and not just the Assumption Negation Technique for assumption questions...)

[sirphillup]

Saw this tip a few days ago and thought it was great: Remember that one of your answers of the two is wrong. Focus on trying to negate the two answers - one should pop out immediately.

If you've already isolated question types that you're having trouble with, you're off to a good start. You should try a couple different approaches with each type, as something that might work for one might not work for another.

Since LG seems to be a strong point for you, you may consider trying out diagramming for a question type or two - I ended up diagramming most assumption questions to reinforce what I needed to be looking for. As with anything you try, though, don't overdo it.

Thanks for the prompt response! I will try out your tip... how exactly do you diagram an assumption question? It seems like a good idea, even if just to check my answer.

[incompetentia]

Saw this tip a few days ago and thought it was great: Remember that one of your answers of the two is wrong. Focus on trying to negate the two answers - one should pop out immediately. .

What do you mean by "focus on trying to negate the two answers"? (I assume you're talking about all questions here and not just the Assumption Negation Technique for assumption questions...)

I meant that one of the answer choices will be logically incorrect, and it's better to focus on trying to find the incorrect answer rather than the correct answer when you're down to two. Apologies if that wasn't clear.


Also, diagramming would look something like this:

Given: A->B and C->D->E->F. What needs to be assumed for A->E? Well, if your answer choice can connect the top line of reasoning (A or B) to C, D, or E, you can mark that as correct. (In this case, you'd probably see A->F and/or B->F as a distractor)

[the_pakalypse]

Saw this tip a few days ago and thought it was great: Remember that one of your answers of the two is wrong. Focus on trying to negate the two answers - one should pop out immediately. .

What do you mean by "focus on trying to negate the two answers"? (I assume you're talking about all questions here and not just the Assumption Negation Technique for assumption questions...)

I meant that one of the answer choices will be logically incorrect, and it's better to focus on trying to find the incorrect answer rather than the correct answer when you're down to two. Apologies if that wasn't clear.


Also, diagramming would look something like this:

Given: A->B and C->D->E->F. What needs to be assumed for A->E? Well, if your answer choice can connect the top line of reasoning (A or B) to C, D, or E, you can mark that as correct. (In this case, you'd probably see A->F and/or B->F as a distractor)

I'm a bit confused by your example. Could you elaborate? I'm not really sure if I've seen a question where you only need to prove A -> E... and yet E is not the conclusion... Basically what I'm trying to say is, why would A/B -> F be distractors??