Top Law Schools

These questions often appear as the last question in a particular game. Does anyone have a specific method that works for tackling these? So far I've been looking at the inferences from the original rule and seeing which new rule produces the same inferences. However, this is pretty time consuming. Any advice on how to be more efficient with these questions?

WhiteHouse wrote:These questions often appear as the last question in a particular game. Does anyone have a specific method that works for tackling these? So far I've been looking at the inferences from the original rule and seeing which new rule produces the same inferences. However, this is pretty time consuming. Any advice on how to be more efficient with these questions?

IIRC, there really aren't strategies. Its a relatively new type of question, but you're almost guaranteed to see one during modern PTs. Its more of trial and error. I just force my way through thm. For example

if you're subbing the rule "X can only be 1st or 2nd" then you test each of the answer choices where you'll still only have X as 1 or 2.

Tougher questions, but you basically have to prove the wrong answers false, and end up with the right one. These are time consuming. I hate them

WhiteHouse wrote:These questions often appear as the last question in a particular game. Does anyone have a specific method that works for tackling these? So far I've been looking at the inferences from the original rule and seeing which new rule produces the same inferences. However, this is pretty time consuming. Any advice on how to be more efficient with these questions?

I almost always skip and come back

this might help - https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/reso ... t-rule.cfm - mk

1. The answer must allow everything the old rule allowed
2. The answer must forbid everything the old rule forbade

This helps for elimination. If an answer allows an invalid scenario, it's wrong. If it bans a correct past scenario, it's wrong.

A lot of answers are "true" under the existing rules. Answers are not right just because they're "true". You're looking for something that has effects 1 and 2 above.

Finally, the most important thing:

3. There aren't many ways to rephrase a rule. Usually, they'll use an effect of the existing rules.

For instance, if A can't go with B, and BC always must go together, then A can't go with C is another way to phrase the rule. That seems simple, but I've seen that variant used on at least two LSATs, and people complained how hard the question was.

Usually, the rule in question has a secondary effect. Figure out what the secondary effect is, then evaluate the answers through that frame.

Scan it (5-7 secs) and then skip it if you don't see the answer. Or don't even scan it; these are newish, hard to practice, and a notorious potential time waster. Just pre-decide to skip it and then come back; even if you get it right either way, the confidence of not spending the time up front will help you in later games