Question Strategies Flashcards
When going through the answer choices…
…absolutes and certainty should be your sole focus. Do not worry about what cannot be determined with certainty. Don’t go through all of the answer choices trying to find something that works - quickly eliminate ACs you know are wrong based on the rules and look for the AC that is most likely to work or has the most restrictions and try that first.
For Could Be True questions…
…the AC is uncertain so if you don’t immediately see one that will work, use the rules to eliminate the ACs that definitely won’t work.
When To Stop Making Inferences/Diagraming and Move On To The Questions (Part 1)
Think of it like microwaving popcorn. As you’re listening and you hear the pops start slowing down and the time between the pops starts to increase then you know its time to take it out. Same with diagraming/making inferences, when the time between each inference you make increases its time to move on.
When To Stop Making Inferences/Diagraming & Move On To The Questions (Part 2)
After you’ve quickly made the initial inferences don’t get sucked into another 2 or 3 minutes trying to find more but they might not even be useful for the questions and you’ve now wasted time.
When To Stop Making Inferences/Diagraming and Move On To The Questions (Part 3)
So you spend another 60, 90, 120 seconds playing with hypotheticals or testing possibilities to see if there’s more to discover. Maybe you find something! That’s great, but was it worth the time spent? Probably not, since it’s extremely likely a question would have tipped you off to it naturally as you kept working (or, also probable, that it wouldn’t have been tested at all, in which case who cares?). The truth is, if there are still a few general truths to be found the questions themselves should alert you to them, and you can amend your setup accordingly as you go.
When To Stop Making Inferences/Diagraming and Move On To The Questions (Part 4)
And what about the case when you spend that extra time up front and find nothing, no additional inferences? Then all you’ve accomplished is forfeiting time, a major LSAT sin. Either way, new deductions or not, the time it took to find them (or not) simply isn’t worth the potential payoff, assuming there even is one. Your risk dwarfs your reward. Let the questions fill in any blanks that might exist on a level where you’re struggling to find them on your own.
When To Stop Making Inferences/Diagraming and Move On To The Questions (Part 5)
What IS a killer in games - is the inclusion of something that’s NOT true, an inference that is actually less certain than you’ve shown it to be. You can sail breezily through a game even if your setup lacks a few minor deductions…but you’re in serious trouble if your setup lists deductions that are incorrect or exaggerated. So make your focus on showing only those things that are absolutely true, and moving confidently to the questions as soon as you feel your inference making begin to lag, letting the questions themselves fill in any knowledge gaps that might still exist.
When You Feel Like You’ve Missed A Major Inference…
If you feel like you haven’t identified the major inference just work with what you have and make sure you have a clear idea of the restrictions in the initial diagram you’ve made and move on to the questions. After the first Ordering question, do a local question that addresses the most restricted player - with the mindset that you don’t know the major inference but you’re looking for it. Hopefully this question will illuminate the missing inference. When using this strategy remember to quickly eliminate ACs that you know won’t work.
MUST and CANNOT occur vs COULD occur
ALWAYS focus only on elements that can be known with certainty: LG success comes from concentrating exclusively on what MUST occur and what CANNOT occur, and ignoring those situations/events that are merely possible (the COULD idea that so many people get hung up on).
DON’T do the games in order (Part 1)
Your first action when you get to Logic Games on test day is to quickly scan the four games and determine the order that is most preferable for YOU. Don’t just dive in to Game 1 and start working through it, at least not until you have looked at Games 2-4 and decided that the first game is likely to be the easiest for you.
So if you see a game that looks inherently straightforward, or representative of a scenario in which you were successful in the past, chances are high that that game would be a reasonable place to start, and if you begin reading a game scenario that is confusing or wholly unfamiliar, save it for the end when you have completed everything else.
DON’T do the games in order (Part 2)
The advantages to this strategy of adaptive attack are multi-fold. Not only does it allow you to begin the section with what is likely to be a successful, rewarding experience, establishing confidence and momentum, but it also ensures, as much as is possible, that your time in the section is spent where it will confer the greatest benefit: on the games where your odds of a strong performance are highest.
Try to “Flash Memorize” Rules
I realized during my practice how I would struggle more when I had to keep looking back at my rules over and over(from question to question and even just answer choice to answer choice) vs when I had most of them memorized. So, after writing rules down and making inferences and making templates if necessary, spend an extra 20-30 seconds just staring at the rules and trying to memorize at least most of them. Otherwise, you lose so much time moving your eyes and head back and forth from the rules to the questions, and the risk of overlooking or reading something wrong is higher when you look at it more. Try to make that a habit—it’s worth the 20 second time investment up front.
ALWAYS Circle Random Players
ALWAYS circle random items (items that don’t have any rules or that were not talked about.) When there are two of them, those two items are essentially the same and aren’t unique with respect to each other. So when you see a Global question asking something like “which one of the following must be in _____ position” I know that both floater items are wrong because they’re the same. If two answers are ever the same, both are wrong. That goes for any section.
Know When Rules Don’t Matter
For example if a rule says “if X is on 5 then P is on 7:”
X5 —-> P7
You have to know that if at any point P is in 7, the rule goes away. The rule no longer matters. You’ve satisfied the necessary condition, the rule goes away, you cannot contradict that rule. Essentially, X can go in any slot.
And conversely, if at any point X goes in any slot besides 5, you have negated the sufficient condition and the rule falls away. The rule no longer matters.
The 2 Skills LSAT Test Writers Reward You For On Logic Games
The 2 skills they reward you for having (beyond being able to read basic rules, beyond being able to understand a simple conditional chain) are:
1) Can you make deep inferences?
2) Do you know when there ARE NOT deep inferences to make?
I point this out because when I first learned to split the game setup on Logic Games, I wanted to do it constantly, which was counterproductive.
- Do you know when a certain game only has a few possible game possibilities and scenarios?
- Do you know when the game is very open and you simply have to let the questions and the rules drive the game?
These two skills are what I figured were more precious than gold.
