LSAT Flashcards
Describe the main components of an ideal experiment.
An ideal experiment should include randomization and a large sample size.
How do modifier words affect argument analysis?
Modifier words can impact answer selection by altering the meaning or strength of the argument.
Define the difference between weakening and strengthening questions in argument analysis.
Weakening questions look for modifiers in answers that may exclude the answer, while strengthening questions do not declare the conclusion to be true.
Explain the significance of analogies in arguments.
If an analogy is used, the answer choice will likely need to discuss the relationship of the analogy and consider relevant differences.
What is the difference between a sufficient and a necessary assumption?
A sufficient assumption guarantees the truth of the conclusion, while a necessary assumption is required for the conclusion to have any chance of being true.
How can you identify a necessary assumption in a question?
Narrow the answer choices down to two, then negate both; if negating the right choice causes the argument to fall apart, it is the necessary assumption.
Describe the importance of question clarity in LSAT preparation.
Thoroughly reading the question stem and rephrasing it helps ensure understanding before selecting answer choices.
What practice method can help with identifying conditional reasoning flaws?
Make a note of the main conditional statements and check for reversals or negations in the argument.
How can you distinguish between stated information and inferred information in arguments?
Identify what is explicitly provided in the stimulus versus what must be assumed for the answer to work.
What is a useful practice method for summarizing passage organization?
Create a brief outline of main points and the author’s stance after reading each passage.
How can timing and efficiency be improved during reading comprehension sections?
Avoid over-rereading and set a time cap per question to prevent spending too long on one.
Define a causal flaw in argumentation.
A causal flaw assumes a cause-and-effect relationship based solely on correlation or co-occurrence.
What is a conditional logic flaw?
A conditional logic flaw incorrectly interprets conditional relationships, often through mistaken reversals or negations.
Explain the sampling flaw in arguments.
A sampling flaw bases a conclusion on a biased or too small sample that is not representative of the whole.
Describe the comparison flaw in reasoning.
A comparison flaw assumes that similarities in one aspect imply similarities in all aspects.
What is an ad hominem flaw?
An ad hominem flaw attacks the character or motives of a person instead of addressing the argument itself.
How does an appeal to authority function as a flaw?
It assumes a claim is true simply because an authority believes it, regardless of the authority’s relevance.
Define a false dilemma in argumentation.
A false dilemma assumes there are only two options when more exist.
What is the part-to-whole flaw?
This flaw assumes that what is true of the parts must also be true of the whole, or vice versa.
Explain the concept of equivocation in arguments.
Equivocation uses the same word or phrase in different senses, creating ambiguity.
What are the components of an argument?
An argument consists of premises and conclusions, with relationships critical for understanding.
How do premises and conclusions function in an argument?
A premise supports a conclusion, while a conclusion is supported by one or more premises.
What is the significance of context in understanding arguments?
Context helps distinguish the meaning of the argument from the argument itself.
Describe the difference between formal and informal logic in arguments.
Formal logic emphasizes the form of the argument, while informal logic encompasses all other types of reasoning.
What is the relationship between sets in logic?
Sets can have relationships where one set (the superset) completely subsumes another set (the subset).
How do necessary and sufficient conditions differ?
A necessary condition is required for an outcome, while a sufficient condition guarantees the outcome.
Provide an example of a necessary condition.
Being a citizen is a necessary condition for voting in the United States.
Give an example of a sufficient condition.
If it is raining, then the ground will be wet; rain is a sufficient condition for wet ground.
Describe the difference between a necessary condition and a sufficient condition.
A necessary condition is required for an outcome to be possible, while a sufficient condition guarantees the outcome alone.
How can you identify a necessary assumption in an argument?
Narrow the answer choices down to two, then negate both. If negating the right choice causes the argument to fall apart, it is the necessary assumption.
Define the contrapositive in logical arguments.
The contrapositive is a claim that is logically equivalent to the original claim, formed by flipping and negating both the hypothesis and conclusion.
Explain the significance of validity in arguments.
Validity means that if all premises are assumed to be true, then the conclusion must also be true, regardless of whether the premises are actually true.
How does one apply the translation rule for sufficient conditions?
Identify the conditional indicator, the two main concepts, assign symbols, and then apply the translation rule.
What is the role of conditional indicators in logical arguments?
Conditional indicators help to identify the relationship between sufficient and necessary conditions in an argument.
Describe the process of negating a sufficient condition.
To negate a sufficient condition, swap ‘and’ for ‘or’ and negate each of the conjuncts.
How can one differentiate between ‘inclusive or’ and ‘exclusive or’?
‘Inclusive or’ allows for both options to be true, while ‘exclusive or’ means only one option can be true, not both.
What is the structure of a valid conditional argument?
Membership in Set A is sufficient for membership in Set B; if X is a member of Set A, then X is also a member of Set B.
Explain the concept of chaining conditionals in logical arguments.
Chaining conditionals involves linking multiple premises where the conclusion of one premise serves as a premise for the next.
How does one evaluate the reasoning of an argument on a test?
Assume the premises are true and determine if the conclusion logically follows from those premises.
Define the term ‘negation’ in the context of logical arguments.
Negation refers to the contradiction of a statement, indicating that the statement is not true.
What is the importance of recognizing correlation versus causation in arguments?
Just because two events occur together does not mean one causes the other; assumptions based solely on correlation can lead to incorrect conclusions.
How can one simplify an embedded conditional?
By extracting the embedded sufficient condition and making it a conjunct of the outside conditional.
What is the significance of the ‘only if’ rule in necessary conditions?
The ‘only if’ rule indicates that the condition is required for the outcome to occur, but does not imply it is the only way for the outcome to happen.
Describe the relationship between subsets and supersets in logical arguments.
A subset represents a sufficient condition for membership in a superset, which is a necessary condition.
How can one apply the joint sufficient condition framework?
By simplifying an embedded conditional to clarify the relationship between the sufficient condition and its exceptions.
What does it mean for an argument to be valid despite having false premises?
An argument can be valid if the conclusion logically follows from the premises, even if those premises are not true.
Explain the difference between negation and opposition.
Negation means contradiction, while opposition refers to a contrasting position; they are not the same.
How can one interpret the use of ‘and’ in conjunctions within sufficient conditions?
In conjunctions, both elements together guarantee the necessary condition, meaning neither alone is independently sufficient.
What is the implication of failing a necessary condition in a contrapositive argument?
Failing the necessary condition allows for the conclusion that the sufficient condition must also fail.
How does one handle disjunctions in logical arguments?
If a disjunction occurs within the necessary condition, at least one of the conditions must trigger when the sufficient condition is met.
What is the purpose of identifying rules and exceptions in logical frameworks?
This approach helps clarify the conditions under which certain outcomes are valid or invalid.
How can one recognize the traps in logical reasoning regarding sufficient and necessary conditions?
By understanding that failing a sufficient condition yields no information about the necessary condition, and vice versa.
Describe the difference between sufficient and necessary conditions in logic.
A sufficient condition guarantees the outcome if met, while a necessary condition must be met for the outcome to occur.
Define bi-conditionals in logical terms.
Bi-conditionals indicate that two statements are both necessary and sufficient for each other, expressed as ‘A if and only if B’.
How does the quantifier ‘few’ differ from ‘several’?
‘Few’ means some but not many, implying most are not, while ‘several’ indicates more than one or two but is ambiguous about the exact number.
Explain the implications of the quantifier ‘most’.
‘Most’ indicates at least 50% of a set, but it can include or exclude ‘all’, depending on context.
What is the negation of an ‘all’ statement?
To negate an ‘all’ statement, you assert that there is at least one instance that does not belong to the set.
How do you negate a conditional statement?
To negate ‘If A then B’, you assert that A can occur without B, expressed as ‘A and not B’.
Describe the logic of intersecting sets in relation to quantifiers.
Intersecting sets with quantifiers can be ambiguous, as terms like ‘few’, ‘several’, and ‘most’ can imply different relationships between the sets.
What is the significance of the contrapositive in logical statements?
The contrapositive of a conditional statement ‘A ‚Üí B’ is ‘not B ‚Üí not A’, and it is logically equivalent to the original statement.
How can causal relationships be evaluated in arguments?
Causal relationships can be evaluated by checking if the cause precedes the effect and if similar circumstances yield consistent results.
Define correlation and its relationship to causation.
Correlation refers to a relationship where two phenomena change together, but it does not imply that one causes the other.
What is the ideal method for establishing causation through experimentation?
The ideal method involves using a large random sample, assigning it to test and control groups, and comparing results to isolate the causal impact.
Explain the concept of ‘overwhelming majority’ in logical terms.
An overwhelming majority indicates a proportion greater than a simple majority, but the exact amount is not specified.
How does the quantifier ‘some’ differ from ‘most’?
‘Some’ indicates at least one with no upper limit, while ‘most’ requires at least 50% and can imply a majority.
What is the relationship between ‘most’ and ‘some’ in logical arguments?
In logical arguments, ‘most’ can imply ‘some’, but ‘some’ does not imply ‘most’, as ‘some’ can be just one.
Describe the implications of affirming the necessary condition in a logical argument.
Affirming the necessary condition does not yield valid conclusions; failing it does.
What is the role of alternative hypotheses in evaluating causal arguments?
Alternative hypotheses help identify other potential explanations for observed phenomena, strengthening or weakening the original argument.
How can one visualize the relationship between premises in formal arguments?
Using buckets to represent sets, where scoops represent the transfer of elements between sets, can help visualize logical relationships.
What does it mean to deny the sufficient condition in a logical argument?
Denying the sufficient condition does not lead to valid conclusions, as it does not provide evidence for the outcome.
Explain the concept of ‘causal mechanism’ in logic.
A causal mechanism provides a detailed explanation of how one phenomenon leads to another, answering the ‘how?’ question.
Describe the purpose of random assignments in experiments.
Random assignments into test and control groups help to cleanly isolate causal forces.
Define the placebo effect in the context of experiments.
The placebo effect occurs when participants’ belief in the effectiveness of a treatment causes therapeutic effects, complicating the interpretation of results.
How can the placebo effect be mitigated in experiments?
By using a placebo that mimics the treatment but has no therapeutic effect and ensuring both groups are blinded to their treatment status.
Explain the concept of blinding in experiments.
Blinding ensures that neither participants nor administrators know who is receiving the treatment or placebo, preventing bias in data collection.
What are the two types of blinding in experiments?
Single blinding, where participants are unaware of their group assignment, and double blinding, where both participants and administrators are unaware.
Discuss the importance of compliance in experimental protocols.
Compliance is crucial as non-compliance, such as a control group seeking external treatment, can invalidate the results.
How does accurate data collection impact experimental validity?
Accurate and objective data collection is essential; errors in data recording can compromise the validity of the experiment.
Identify the main conclusion in an argument.
The main conclusion is the central point or claim the author is making, which they are trying to convince you of.
What is a common strategy for identifying the main conclusion in an argument?
Look for referential phrasing or conclusion indicators in the answer choices.
Explain the significance of context in understanding an argument.
Context may include reporting on other people’s views, which the author will later offer commentary on, helping to set up the argument.
What should you consider when determining if a claim is a premise?
Ask if the claim, if true, makes the conclusion more likely to be true.
List common patterns found in wrong answer choices for main conclusion questions.
- Stating a premise or context. 2. Stating assumptions of the argument. 3. Stating a sub-conclusion. 4. Leveraging grammar or logical confusions.
Outline the steps to approach a main conclusion question.
- Read the question stem and identify it as an MC question. 2. Read the stimulus carefully. 3. Identify context, premises, and main conclusion. 4. Hunt for conclusion paraphrasing in answer choices.
What is the goal of Most Strongly Supported (MSS) questions?
To identify the conclusion hidden in the answer choices based on the support provided in the stimulus.
How should you evaluate answer choices in MSS questions?
Use the spectrum of support to filter answers, ensuring the correct answer receives the most support relative to the others.
What is the purpose of Point at Issue (PAI) questions?
To identify the statement where two speakers agree or disagree based on their statements.
Describe the characteristics of Disagree type PAI questions.
One speaker supports the answer while the other anti-supports it, often requiring inference.
What is the focus of Inference and Must Be True (MBT) questions?
To identify the answer that must be true based on the information provided in the stimulus.
How can you effectively approach MBT questions?
Piece together valid inferences and use process of elimination to rule out weakly supported or irrelevant answers.
What is the goal of Resolve, Reconcile, or Explain (REE) questions?
To identify the answer that resolves an apparent contradiction or discrepancy in the stimulus.
