For the Logical Reasoning section..... Forum

[LionelHutzJD]

Is it completely neccesary to use all of the sufficient/necessary condition work that the PS bible tells us to do? It seems like a lot for me to deal with in a timed section. How much easier does it make the section? Is it possible to do ok without that work?

[JJDancer]

Do you mean diagramming it like P --> M, -M --> -P?
That stuff won't apply to all questions in LR but can be helpful in getting LR overall to be more intuitive and on more complex structural (parallel reasoning type) questions.

[LionelHutzJD]

Do you mean diagramming it like P --> M, -M --> -P?
That stuff won't apply to all questions in LR but can be helpful in getting LR overall to be more intuitive and on more complex structural (parallel reasoning type) questions.

Yeah, pretty much. I was just hoping i can skate by without it

[JJDancer]

I don't think every person needs that to "get" LR but you probably need some way to conceptualize the stimulus. There may be other ways that work better for you.

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

Yeah, pretty much. I was just hoping i can skate by without it[/quote]

Not a good idea. LG uses it alllllll the time. And if learning that seems like a lot of work, wait until law school

[JJDancer]

Yeah, pretty much. I was just hoping i can skate by without it

Not a good idea. LG uses it alllllll the time. And if learning that seems like a lot of work, wait until law school[/quote]
Bolded = credited.

[princeR]

Ehhh, good luck running into a complex conditional sufficient question without diagramming it. I mean, I guess you could do it, but sometimes it just makes it SOOOOO much easier to have it diagrammed. Actually, I like it the most for those conditional MBT questions.

[thestalkmore]

If you need to ask this question, the answer is probably no, you cannot skip it. Do the work.

[Ded Precedent]

Diagram it on the page while you learn and get used to how LSAT conditional reasoning works. After you see it enough you should be able to skip actual diagramming on most questions but there will always be a few complex conditional chain questions that you'll have to write out to keep track of.

[Jeffort]

Is it completely neccesary to use all of the sufficient/necessary condition work that the PS bible tells us to do? It seems like a lot for me to deal with in a timed section. How much easier does it make the section? Is it possible to do ok without that work?

Conditional reasoning, aka sufficient and necessary conditional relationships is the most heavily tested logical concept that permeates the LSAT. That is why good prep courses and prep materials focus heavily on teaching it from the start in order to give you a good foundation with the concepts.

The various permutations of conditional methods of reasoning (valid and flawed applications of it commonly used to form conclusions) are tested heavily in both the LR sections and the LG section. So, the simple answer is YES, you need to learn the ins and outs of it if you want to achieve a high score.

Keep in mind though, not every LR question/argument is based on conditional reasoning, so you should not try to force A B type diagramming onto every question. You need to develop the ability to recognize when conditional logic is being used so that you know which approach(es) to apply to the question.

The purpose of all the lessons, drills and such in good prep classes/course books/class books regarding this type of reasoning is to teach you the concepts in order to drill them into your mind/way of thinking when you approach questions that use S/N conditions so that you do not make mistakes that can cost you many points on test day.

It's very easy to fall for trap answers because you didn't spot a flawed reversal and/or made one yourself when interpreting the material. Same goes for flawed negation mistakes and several other common mistakes with ways conditional logic works.

In the logical reasoning sections, it is most often found in must be true, must be false, sufficient assumption/justify the conclusion, parallel reasoning, flawed parallel the reasoning, and the various forms of principle question types. In the logic games section, it's present all over the place and in various different game types.

Don't mistake the fact that good prep sources try to get you to do a ton of diagramming while teaching you how to increase your score for the idea that you will have to do a ton of diagramming on test day to perform well. The repetitive drills and such are meant for educational/training purposes to get you good at it for when it IS appropriate to do, to get you good at recognizing WHEN it is useful to do, and so that you can do it fast and correctly when appropriate.

I don't know what score you are shooting for or need for your target schools, but your statement about wanting to 'skate by without it' does not bode well for your ultimate LSAT score given that it indicates a lack of serious dedication to work and study hard to maximize your score, which is a necessary condition to achieve a high score on test day.

[Micdiddy]

tl;dr

It's extremely important. Learn it.

[broadstreet11]

it indicates a lack of serious dedication to work and study hard to maximize your score, which is a necessary condition to achieve a high score on test day.

Well played, sir. Well damn played.

[thestalkmore]

it indicates a lack of serious dedication to work and study hard to maximize your score, which is a necessary condition to achieve a high score on test day.

Well played, sir. Well damn played.

[LionelHutzJD]

Ok, "skate by without" was the wrong choice of words i guess. I was just wondering what everyone thought. There is certainly no lack of dedication however considering I have been studying for a month now and will begin a 3 month testmasters course in july. I will continue to work on conditional reasoning.

[JJDancer]

I just remembered I have an word doc in which I compiled some formal logic information/advice etc. I can email it to you if you want. PM me.

[TheColonel]

Ok, "skate by without" was the wrong choice of words i guess. I was just wondering what everyone thought. There is certainly no lack of dedication however considering I have been studying for a month now and will begin a 3 month testmasters course in july. I will continue to work on conditional reasoning.

I have found that I diagram conditionals probably twice per LR section, whereas when I started it was probably closer to 5x. So if by skate by you meant "do not have to write out the formal structures every time since I have been practicing this for months and can keep this straight in my head" then yes. On LG, however, I still write out all of the conditionals and their contrapositives because I like to have everything very visually laid out.