LSAT Short Arguments - How to ID + Process Situational Questions: Paradox, Principle Above, Situation Conforms

Question 1

What are the 3 types of Situational Questions in short arguments?

Answer 1

Paradox

Principle Above

Situation Conforms

Please Prepare Sausage

Question 2

• “resolves the paradox…”*
• “explains the surprising results…”*
• “does most to explain the surprising result…”*
• “resolve or reconcile the discrepancy…”*
• “explain the difference…”*
• “of the following, most helps to reconcile”*
• “explains…”*
• “which of the following, if true, EXPLAINS…”*

Answer 2

Situational - Paradox Question

Do not ID conclusion! Do the Even Though process, and remember Dox is a Q type where you take all ACs as golden gospel truth, so don’t bristle at crazy-sounding ACs here!

To summarize using “Even Though…” (first find expected) then say “because xxx reason, we expected expected, but actual happened, because AC.” AC must address the scope/duration of the apparent paradoxical evidence

First ID Expected Outcome, (probably unstated and not in the prompt) which may be simply a negation of the Actual Outcome (probably stated in the prompt near the end)

Then say:

“Even though Because or Why stmt (which is probably in the prompt) explaining why we expected the expected outcome…Actual Outcome happened anyway due to (CORRECT AC, which resolves paradox and probably introduces new information).”

Note: paradox Qs often tap into Assumption-Based type flaws: e.g. 64.2.6 Tornadoes using Bad Info flaw (“recorded”) to make the paradox a paradox!

*Note sometimes the Question Stem wlll ID the Actual Outcome!* Explain why the sales dropped… etc

take ACs as true, and evidence as true, then say I want an answer choice that makes me exlplain ACTUAL outcome even though EXPECTED outcome was expected

Note there are 4 types of Qs where you take Evidence AND all the ACs as Golden Gospel Truth: Ass-Wkn, Ass-Str, Sit-pradox, and Ass-suff

Note “many” and “some” in Strengthen and Weaken and Dox and Suf ACs should be read as “two”

Question 3

principle illustrated above…

principle stated above…

policy above….

conforms to the principle above… (yes, conforms is in Q stem but it is not an RCON

principles above, if valid, most help justify the reasoning in which of the following…

Answer 3

Situational - Principle Above Question –note the word “principle” in Q stem may or may not indicate a PA question-

Read Question Stem - does it

• refer to a principle STATED in the argument (and you must select the AC which is a specific situation and ILLUSTRATION of that principle), or does it
• refer to a principle I_LLUSTRATED_ in the argument (and you must select the principle STATED in the ACs)

Do not separate E from C. May not even have a conclusion.. Just symbolize if-thens and most-dudes all together, not separate E from C.

Correct AC: Look for Big LSAT concepts in argument to match the illustration or principle in the ACs: if/then, causality, comparisons, recs, strong language, qualifiers, etc. Order does not matter. If ACs have an evidence-to-conclusion flow, the EVIDENCE in the AC must match TRIGGER in argument, and CONCLUSION in AC must match RESULTS in argument.

*note: read Q stem closely! sometimes there will be a qualifier in the Q stem as to what is being asked about, i.e. part of the argument may be irrelevant to the question*

Correct AC will ILLUSTRATE or STATE the principle of the main argument. Order of argument does not matter, just make sure all the elements match

Question 4

• “situation above most conforms to…”*
• “the following principle/generalization…”*
• “situation above best illustrates the following proposition…”*
• “exemplified by the situation above…”*
• “the situation above…conforms to the principle”*
• “of the following propositions is best illustrated by the situation above…”*

Answer 4

Situational - Situation Conforms Question

First ID the two parts of the Situation in the argument (but note it’s not a full blown argument for SitCon questions, it’s like Principle Above but w/o full argument). No proper conclusion and evidence. It’s a situation:

The Result: usually last, ID’d by contrast word

The Background: something where someone is trying to do something, may begin to look like paradox

Assess the relationship between Background and Result in your own words. Then go to ACs. Find similar language in AC, avoid ALL or MOST or strongly worded ACs. Look for “can” or “may.”

think of “conform” as meaning “close” (i.e. slightly more or slightly less)

*note: read Q stem closely! sometimes there will be a qualifier in the Q stem as to what is being asked about, i.e. part of the argument may be irrelevant to the question*