Casebriefs Lsat Course Workbook 3o7249

LSAT Workbook

Table of Contents 3 Lesson One: An Introduction to the LSAT 9 Lesson Two: Welcome to the Workbook! 84 Lesson Three: An Introduction to Logic Games 115 Lesson Four: Logical Reasoning Main Point, Logical Completion, Method of Reasoning, and Role of Statement Questions 137 Lesson Five: Inference and Disagreement Questions 181 Lesson Six: Strengthening, Weakening, and Paradox Questions 217 Lesson Seven: An Introduction to Reading Comprehension 251 Lesson Eight: Grouping Games 261 Lesson Nine: Assumption Questions 297 Lesson Ten: Flawed Reasoning 322 Lesson Eleven: Reading Comprehension II 327 Lesson Twelve: Advanced Sequence Hybrid Games 337 Lesson Thirteen: Parallel Reasoning and Principle Questions 368 Review: Prep Test 61

LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

An Introduction to the LSAT


Why we o!er a free LSAT course • A!ordable - all you need to do get started is the June 2007 test from lsac.org , and to enjoy the full course all you need to buy is one book of 10 LSATs (buying a second book, to really hone your skills at prep tests, is suggested, but not required). • Excellent – we have many of same basic strategies as the major test preparation companies, but I’ve refined and improved many of them over my years of teaching. I started teaching the LSAT in 1996, and by working with 1000s of students, I’ve seen how some companies’ strategies are needlessly confusing and/or deceptively simple. • Why do we do this – the purpose of standardized testing, from the first known standardized test in human history (the Chinese Civil Service exam) to the LSAT, is to find the students with the greatest ability. Money should not be a barrier to the best possible performance.


The LSAT • Three scored sections • Two sections of Logical Reasoning " The heart of the LSAT, the most important part of any preparation course. • One section of Analytical Reasoning (Logic Games) " The scariest section, but it has gotten easier since 2004 " Students typically see the most dramatic improvements here • One section of Reading Comprehension " The most straight-forward section, so we spend the least amount of time on it, but don’t ignore it in your preparation. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

The LSAT • One experimental section " Always in the first three sections, could be any of the three section types " No way to tell which one is experimental before the test, but you can figure it out afterward. For example, if you had Logic Games first and fourth, you know the first section was experimental. • One Writing Sample " Not scored (there was a recent scare that it would be scored, but that possibility has been tabled “indefinitely”) " Used as proof of ability to write in the English language. It’s not a major factor in issions, so we don’t spend any time on it in class


Scoring on the LSAT • 120-180 (just like the SAT 200-800) • Raw score is the number of questions you get right (there are no points o! for wrong answers, so always guess!) • Raw score is equated to a “scaled score” on the 120-180 scale, which is equivalent to a percentile – the test is curved using experimental sections; i.e., the curve is not simply against those who take the same LSAT as you. The di#cultly of a test has been determined beforehand. • Just three more points, three more correct answers, in each scored section can be enough to boost your percentile by 20, so a little improvement goes a long way!


Before you go to Lesson Two • Take the free June 2007 LSAT: http:// lsac.org/jd/pdfs/SamplePTJune.pdf • Purchase the 10 New Actual LSAT Prep Tests w/ Comparative Reading: • https://os.lsac.org/Release/Shop/ PublicationDetail.aspx • for the LSAT: the best locations fill up quickly!: • http://lsac.org/JD/LSAT/test-datesdeadlines.asp LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Welcome to the workbook! • This workbook is intended to be read along with the video. I’ve tried to include anything not included in the video. You’ll also find exercises not included in the videos. Take your time to do them before we move on. For this lesson, you also need your June 2007 Prep Test on hand. Let’s get started! LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Your first prep test • Don’t worry too much about your score. It’s just a baseline to see how much you need to improve to get the score you want. As you can see in the video, even slight improvements in your raw score (the number of questions you get right) can lead to dramatic improvements in your percentile (the percentage of students LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Two: Logical • So let’s get started with Logical Reasoning. Here’s a question from your recent test: • June 2007, Section II, #21 • I think that you should read the age, not the question, first. I feel that one becomes a better reader and analyzer of arguments this way. Others might disagree, and ultimately, it’s up LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • The first step is to understand that this is a poor argument. Even if we are convinced by the reasoning, the questions asks us for where the argument is “most vulnerable to criticism” implying that the LSAT thinks this is a bad argument. • It is an oversimplification to say that “the LSAT thinks.” The LSAT questions are written by thousands of individual authors. But as we shall see, these thousands of authors produce questions that all “think” roughly the same way. If we can learn more about this kind of thinking, we’ll be well on our way to mastering the test. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • So the LSAT thinks this argument is a bad one? Why? Because the evidence does not fully the conclusion. On the LSAT, we almost never get to the right answer by doubting the evidence. It might be true that the Driver has done some poor research and that accident rates are really not lower for minivans, but on the LSAT, we accept the evidence, yet doubt the conclusion. So we accept that minivans have lower accident rates than sports cars, but we doubt that changing cars would cause the Driver to drive more safely. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • It is a pretty silly conclusion, so it’s not hard to see that it is flawed in some major way. Most of us realize that it’s not the kind of car, but the driver, who is responsible for driving safely or recklessly. But the di!cult part of the LSAT is translating our gut response that the argument is poor into a correct answer. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • So we are asked to choose an answer that tells us where the argument is at its most vulnerable. So we have to ask ourselves, what did this argument do? It gave evidence that minivans have lower accident rates than sports cars. It concluded that a minivan would cause the driver to drive more safely. Clearly, then, there is some kind of cause and e!ect error here. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • In the drivers mind, his research findings, that minivans have a lower accident rate, proved that owning a minivan would cause him to drive more safely. The driver took evidence of a correlation (which is just a fancy word for some kind of statistical relationship) and mistakenly concluded that the relationship was causal. What’s really going on here is that minivans have lower accident rates than sports cars because di!erent kinds of drivers buy di!erent kinds of cars. If our same reckless driver purchased a minivan, he probably would be just as likely to crash it as he would a corvette. Let’s take a look at the answer choices: LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • A) "infers a cause from a mere correlation":! correlations are very common on the LSAT, so you must understand how they can be employed correctly and incorrectly in order to get a large number of questions right. A correlation is a statistical relationship that appears not to be merely coincidental.! There are positive correlations: as your LSAT score increases, your chances of getting into Yale increase. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • There are also negative correlations: the more one exercises, the less likely it is that one will have heart disease.! In the last two examples, it is clear that there also a causal relationship at work. We know that a high LSAT score is a major factor (a factor is a synonym for a cause) in getting into a good law school, just as we know that exercise is a factor in having a healthy heart.! LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • But there can be other correlations that do not necessarily imply a causal relationship.! Let's say that we did a study that showed that vegetarians were more likely to live longer than meateaters. Such a study suggests that being a vegetarian contributes to longevity, but it! is also possible that vegetarians might engage in other healthy behaviors (exercise, not smoking, etc) that are the true cause of their longer life spans. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • “A” states clearly what the argument did incorrectly. On test day, if we have done the work analyzing the argument properly, we could confidently pick A and move on. But for now it’s instructive to look at the incorrect answers. Also, even the best LSAT test-takers will sometimes not see exactly what an argument did improperly, and so will have to decide between the competing answer choices. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • B) “relies on a sample that is too narrow.” This might be true. We really know nothing about how extensive the driver’s research was. But because we know nothing about the driver’s research – its sources, the size of its sample – we want to avoid this answer choice. It’s speculative, whereas we have clear proof that the driver definitely committed the error in answer choice A. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • C) “misinterprets evidence that a result is likely as evidence that a result is certain.” C would be better if the argument had evidence that minivans DO cause a majority of drivers to drive more safely, and then the driver concluded that, after purchasing a minivan, he definitely WILL be a safer driver. But C fails because the argument’s evidence doesn’t even do that. It only establishes a correlation, and it’s the leap from correlation to causation that is the argument’s fatal flaw. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • D) "mistakes a condition su!cient for bringing about a result for a condition necessary for doing so“. Su!cient/necessary reversals are extremely common on the LSAT, so you need to be aware of them. In this argument, however, there are none of the key words that indicate conditional reasoning. Such words (all, every, if," when, only, depends, unless, except, etc.) must be present in order to declare that answer choice like D is correct." (For a further discussion of su!cient and necessary conditions, see the analysis of 23.) LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #21 • E) "relies on a source that is probably not well-informed":! We have no indication that the Driver's sources are suspect. Therefore, it would be a mistake to speculate as to whether or not his sources are appropriate.! Actually, attacking the sources for an argument's evidence is usually a major LSAT flaw.! • Let’s look at another problem that contains a bad argument: LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #17 •

The first step is analyzing any argument is identifying the conclusion. The conclusion is that, "we should make the protection of our client's confidentiality our highest priority." Usually, conclusions can be identified through conclusion keywords. We’ll discuss these keywords further when we get into Main Points questions in Lesson 4. Although there are no typical conclusion keywords here, there are two features of the last sentence that indicate it contains the argument's main point: 1) "In light of this testimony" : this phrase introduces that last sentence, and tells us that the testimony s what follows. 2) "we should make" : conclusions often tell us what the author thinks we "should" do.! The argument starts with the opinion of "computer experts" which forms the basis of a call to action, what we "should" do.


June 2007, Section II, #17 • Words like "should" and "ought" do not describe the world as it is; they indicate to us a good course of action. Statements that contain words such as these are called "prescriptive" because they (like a doctor) "prescribe" what we ought to do. You might also might hear them referred to as "normative," because such statements also can be used to define what is proper, "normal" behavior. ("You should brush your teeth twice a day.") Statements that merely describe the world are called, simply enough, "descriptive.“ We’ll talk more about this prescriptive/descriptive distinction when we cover Assumptions in Lesson 9 and Principle Questions in Lesson 13. For now, it’s enough to know that prescriptive statements are often part of a conclusion, because a conclusion is trying to convince us of what we “should” believe or do.


June 2007, Section II, #17 • We know what the conclusion is, and we know it’s a bad one, because the question stem tells us to find the “objection” to which the argument is “most vulnerable.” So what is wrong here? The evidence is that “several computer experts maintained that the most significant threat faced by large institutions such as universities and hospitals is unauthorized access to confidential data.” So why is wrong for a hospital executive to conclude that “we should make the protection of our clients’ confidentiality our highest priority”? LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #17 • Well, let’s think about this is the simplest possible: what do you think should be a hospital’s highest priority? I don’t know about you, but when I go to a hospital, I’m most concerned with leaving alive, and a more minor concern might be my private information being hacked by Wikileaks or News Corporation. Also, it’s odd that the hospital executive would only seek the opinion of a computer expert. Wouldn’t it also be worthwhile to consult the opinions of doctors, nurses, patients, and, heaven forbid, maybe even lawyers? LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #17 • Let’s look at the answer choices: • A) “The argument confuses the causes of a problem with the appropriate solutions to a problem.” This choice doesn’t seem to apply at all. The “causes” of unauthorized access are not discussed. This kind of choice might be tempting for some students, because they don’t get it, and feel that the LSAT is trying to play a trick on them. Usually, if you don’t understand a choice, yet you understand all the words in the choice, the choice is meaningless in the context of the argument and therefore incorrect. Don’t even let yourself get bullied by a choice: if you don’t get it, it’s probably not you that’s wrong, but the choice itself. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #17 • B) “The argument relies on the testimony of experts whose expertise is not shown to be su!ciently broad to their general claim.” This is the correct answer choice, and all it’s really saying is that these computer experts (unless we were told that they are also doctors, or nurses, or patients, or lawyers), don’t have the knowledge to decide what should be the highest priority for a hospital. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #17 • C) “The argument assumes that a correlation between two phenomena is evidence that one is the cause of the other.” This is the same flaw from the previous question, it was correct then, but it’s wrong here. I hope you can see how learning the common LSAT flaws can really help your performance on Logical Reasoning. We’ll discuss this further in Lesson 8. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #17 • D) “The argument draws a general conclusion about a group based on data about an unrepresentative sample of that group.” This choice is similar to B from the previous question, the answer choice that said that the Driver’s research was based on too narrow a sample. While this can be the flaw on a Logical Reasoning question, there is usually specific evidence that the sample is too small or drawn from a part of a group that probably does not speak for the whole. Perhaps these computer experts are particularly crazy. But even if ALL computer experts everywhere agreed that protecting confidentiality should be the highest priority, their expertise would not be wide enough to dictate what a large, complex institution like a hospital should do. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section II, #17 • E) “The argument infers that a property belonging to large institutions belongs to all institutions.” The argument never makes a leap from large institutions to all institutions, so this choice is clearly incorrect.


June 2007, Section II, #17 • You may have noticed that I relied a bit on common sense earlier. Those of you who have taken another LSAT course might object: “My teacher told me that common sense plays no roll on the LSAT, that the real world doesn’t matter, that only the age is real.” Well, that’s just not true. If we weren’t able to use our common sense realization that a hospital has more important things to worry about than hiding a patient’s private information, we would probably find that question much more di!cult. You don’t have to take my word for it. Let’s see what the LSAT authors have to say: LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Logical Reasoning


Logical Reasoning • The age trumps any outside knowledge. But you can use common sense on the LSAT, let’s just make sure that it is good common sense. Part of learning the LSAT is learning how to refine your thinking so your own intuitive reasoning becomes more precise and more powerful. Now let’s tackle another question. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec III, #25 • The conclusion is introduced by conclusion key word, “hence.” We’ll say more about conclusion key words when we discuss Main Point questions in Lesson 4. The conclusion is “the anthropologists’ claim is false.” So what was that that claim? The argument begins with that claim, “Some anthropologists argue….”. This argument structure is very common: the argument begins with a claim about what “some people think,” concludes that this claim is false. So really, the conclusion is that “the human species could not have survived prehistoric times if the species had not evolved the ability to cope with diverse natural environments” is false. What is the evidence for this? LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec III, #25 • The evidence is of one species, Australopithecus Afarensis, which had had such an ability to cope with diverse environments, but did not survive. So why is this evidence not enough to prove the conclusion is true? Because it is still possible that humans NEEDED the ability to survive in diverse environments, even if such an ability is not enough to guarantee survival. Let’s now take a look at the answer choices. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec III, #25 • A) This is the correct answer. The language might be confusing, but all it is saying is that the argument confuses a condition that is required (“necessary”), i.e., the ability to cope with diverse environments, with one that is enough to ensure survival (“su!cient”). The anthropologists claimed that such an ability was necessary. The argument claimed that such an ability was not su!cient, because Australopithecus Afarensis became extinct, and so the anthropologists were wrong. Let’s think of a similarly flawed argument: LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec III, #25 • David: Water is necessary for survival. • Sean: No it’s not. My uncle Shamus had plenty of water, and he still died. • It’s clear here that David was not saying that water is su!cient, that it guarantees survival. His claim was that it was necessary. Sean’s argument fails because in giving an example that proves that water is not su!cient, he has done nothing to disprove David. This argument is analogous to that in #25, because the arguer did nothing to disprove the anthropologists’ claim. The arguer only showed that an ability to cope with diverse environments is not su!cient, so it is incorrect to say that the anthropologists are “wrong” LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec III, #25 • This question introduced the theme of su!cient and necessary conditions, which is the one of most important and di!cult topics in LSAT prep. But before we discuss this topic further, let’s take a quick look at the other answer choices.


June 2007, Sec III, #25 • B) This choice mentions a “related extinct species” but there is no specific species mentioned other than Austalopithecus afarensis. So this choice must be incorrect. • C) This choice mentions a species that survived, but all that is mentioned in the argument is a species that went extinct. So this is clearly incorrect. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

• D) This choice is kind of interesting, because clearly the arguer “failed to consider” lots of factors that might have led to Austalopithecus afarensis’ extinction. So it’s tempting. But when choosing the argument’s most vulnerable weakness, we should first focus on what the argument actually did, rather than what it failed to do. The most serious error is the confusion of su!cient and necessary conditions, so A remains a better choice. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec III, #25 • E) describes a cause and e!ect error. But this argument doesn’t deal with cause and e!ect. It never tells us why A.A. went extinct. So this choice doesn’t apply to this argument and is therefore incorrect.


Conditional Reasoning • Now let’s discuss more deeply one of the most vexing topics for LSAT students, conditional reasoning, which involves the diagramming of su!cient and necessary conditions.


Conditional Reasoning • “To get into Yale Law School, one must take the LSAT.” • YLS!LSAT • LSAT ! YLS is a bad reversal • ~LSAT!~YLS is a bad negation • ~LSAT!~YLS is the contrapositive (which is good!) • (In the video, I put a slash through a statement to negate it. In the workbook, I use the tilda (~) to negate a statement.) LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Conditional Reasoning • “To get into Yale Law School, one must take the LSAT.” • “All those who attend Yale Law School have taken the LSAT.” • “Only those who have taken the LSAT may attend Yale Law School.” • “One cannot go to Yale Law School unless one takes the LSAT.” • All of the above statement are logically equivalent, and can be diagrammed thus: • YLS ! LSAT LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Conditional Reasoning: su!cient condition words • Words that introduce su!cient conditions: " All " Every " Any " “People who” " If " When LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Conditional Reasoning: necessary condition words • Words that introduce necessary conditions: ! Only (or “Only if”) ! Must ! Depends ! Always ! Requires ! Needs LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Conditional Reasoning: “no” statements • • • •

“No man is a fish” M!~F Contrapositive: F!~M (No fish is a man) A “no” statement has a positive su!cient condition and a negated necessary condition.

" LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Conditional Reasoning: “unless” statements • “You cannot go to Yale Law School unless you take the LSAT” • YLS!LSAT • Contrapositive: ~LSAT!~YLS • “Unless”: what the “unless” refers to, make the necessary condition. Negate the su!cient condition. If the condition is already negative (“cannot go Yale Law School”), it becomes positive in the diagram. • The same applies to “except” and “without” LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Conditional Reasoning: “if and only if” • “You can go to the party if you do your LSAT homework.” • LHW!P • “You can go to the party only if you do your LSAT homework.” • P!LHW • “You can go to the party if and only if you do your LSAT homework.” • P<--->LHW ! LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Conditional Reasoning • Here is another argument that involves conditional reasoning (this argument is not in the video). • All cougars are fast. Lexy is a cougar. Therefore, Lexy is fast. If we accept the truth of the premises, this is a valid, or perfect, argument.! We could diagram the argument this way: C!F L: C " ____!!!!!! L: F LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Conditional Reasoning • "All" is a word that introduces a su!cient condition - a su!cient condition is one that is "enough" to know something else. In this case, an animal being a cougar is su!cient, it is enough to know that this animal is fast." When diagramming a statement, we put the su!cient condition on the left side of the arrow, because this condition leads to, or implies, the condition on the right, the necessary condition. Being fast is a necessary, or required, condition of being a cougar." Now consider this argument. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Conditional Reasoning • All cougars are fast. Lexy is fast. Therefore, Lexy is a cougar. This is a flawed argument, because it reverses su!cient and necessary conditions." ( answer choice A, the correct answer choice from the previous question?" If we were asked to describe the flaw in the argument above, answer choice A would be correct here as well.) Just because Lexy is fast, she could be many things besides a cougar: she could be a cheetah, a sports car, a marathon runner, or any number of other fast entities. It would be legitimate to conclude that Lexy might be a cougar, but it is flawed to conclude that she is one.


June 2007, Sec II, #23 • Now let’s discuss more deeply one of the most vexing topics for LSAT students, su!cient and necessary conditions. To get started, let’s look at another di!cult question from the June 2007 test, #23 in section II.


June 2007, Sec II, #23 • The argument deals with morality, and measures actions' morality by how they increase or decrease the "aggregate well-being of people a!ected" by them." In other words, actions are moral or immoral depending on how happy or unhappy they make most people." Many students will find the language in this argument di#cult, but with enough LSAT practice, you will start to become more comfortable with philosophical jargon such as this. • This kind of thinking about morality is called “utilitarianism.” You can find out more about it here: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ utilitarianism-history/ LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec II, #23 • This argument also contains su!cient and necessary conditions. These conditions, which are part of conditional reasoning, are extremely common in this question type, Su!cient Assumption questions." Su!cient Assumption questions require that you make the argument perfect." The question asks us for an answer choice that will make the conclusion "follow logically"; in other words, make the argument logically valid. An answer choice that simply makes the argument better, but not complete, will be wrong." Questions like this often contain conditional reasoning arguments, because such arguments (unlike most arguments, even very reasonable ones) can be made perfect: LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec II, #23 •

The first sentence of the argument can be diagrammed thus: IAW!MR The keyword "if," like "all," introduces a su!cient condition. "EIW" stands for "Expected to Increase Well-being." "MR" stands for "Morally Right."" Try to keep your abbreviations brief. Your diagram will be very sloppy if you diagram the first sentence REIAWPA!MR"""" "REIAWPA" stands for "Reasonably Expected to Increase the Aggregate Well-being of People A#ected." While more complete than the abbreviation above, it is awkward, and counter-productive." The purpose of diagramming is to take a superficially complicated argument and reduce to a simple logical structure - if the diagram is just as, or more, complicated than the argument itself, the diagram will not work to your advantage.


June 2007, Sec II, #23 • The second sentence of the argument features the expression "if and only if."! "If" introduces a su"cient condition, "only if" introduces a necessary condition. So, "if and only if" introduces conditions that are BOTH su"cient and necessary for each other, so we can diagram the second sentence thus: • RAW<---> MW LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec II, #23 • If an action is morally wrong, it reduces the aggregate well-being of people, and vice versa. If an action does not reduce the aggregate wellbeing of people, it is not morally wrong, and vice versa.! So we have two principles, one that gives us a su"cient condition for a morally right action, and another that gives us a su"cient AND necessary condition for a morally wrong action. Now let's look at the conclusion: Thus, actions that would be reasonably expected to leave unchanged the aggregate well-being of the people a#ected by them are also right. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec II, #23 • The conclusion talks about a certain kind of action that is morally right: an action that leaves the aggregate well-being unchanged.! We have no explicit principles about actions that leave the total well-being the same; but, we have principles about increasing and reducing total well-being, and we know that leaving the total well-being the same is NOT increasing it, nor is it reducing it. We can diagram the conclusion like this: UAW!MR Leaving the aggregate well-being unchanged (UAW) is also not increasing aggregate well-being (~IAW) and not reducing aggregate well-bring (~RAW). LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec II, #23 • We want to say that leaving total well-being unchanged is morally right, so the first premise (IAW!MR) at first might appear helpful. But in fact, this principle is completely useless. With UAW, we have the negation of the su!cient condition, which tells us nothing. Consider this argument: All cougars are fast. Lexy is not a cougar. Therefore, Lexy is not fast." Having the negative of the su!cient condition does NOT imply the negative of the necessary. Just because Lexy is not a cougar, doesn't mean she cannot be fast." To think so would be a similar flaw to that described in Question 25, answer choice A.


June 2007, Sec II, #23 •

Now let's look at the second principle. MW<--->RAW We know that leaving total well-being unchanged is also not reducing it. We know from the diagram above that an action that does not reduce well-being is not morally wrong. So, the evidence tells us that leaving the total well-being unchanged is not morally wrong (~MR). The conclusion we need to prove is that leaving total well-being unchanged is morally right. We can therefore predict that the answer choice will be: ~MW!MR A quick glance at the answer choices reveals that C is exactly this ("any" introduces a su!cient condition).


June 2007, Sec II, #23 • For this question, we spent a great deal of time analyzing the argument; such analysis, however, allowed us to quickly spot the correct answer choice. This is the best way to tackle any question that involves diagramming, and many of those questions will be Su!cient Assumption Questions. Now let’s look some more at contrapositives. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

“Or”/”And” in the • “To go to Yale Law School, you must take the LSAT and have a bachelor’s degree.” • YLS! LSAT + BD • Contrapositive: ~LSAT or ~BD ! ~YLS • When taking a contrpositive, “or” always becomes “and”, and “and” always becomes “or”. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

“Or”/”And” in the • “If you become a doctor or a lawyer, your parents will be happy.” D or L ! PH If you were both a doctor and lawyer, your parents would probably be very happy. “Or” implies the possibility of both, unless the logic dictates otherwise. • “If we do not work hard, we will be neither rich nor happy.” • ~WH!~R + ~H • Contrapositive: R or H ! WH LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section III, #22 • The first sentence begins with the word "if." Right away, we should be thinking that this question is a very good candidate for diagramming. In the second sentence, there is an "either...or" statement. In the last sentence, we see the phrase "only if,” which we know introduces a necessary condition. If we have any doubts about diagramming this question, the question stem should put those doubts to rest: it asks for a statement that "follows logically", i.e., a statement that "must be true", which is another way of asking for a statement that is a necessary condition of the stimulus. So diagramming this question will certainly be to our benefit. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section III, #22 • If introduces the su!cient condition, so we can diagram it thus: PCI (Price co"ee increases) ! SIP (Store will increase prices) Be careful not to diagram the first sentence # PI ! PI, because we would have two PIs in our diagram and that would be needlessly confusing. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section III, #22 • The second sentence starts with "in that case". "That case" clearly refers to the store increasing its price (SIP), and prepositional phrases like this often introduce su!cient conditions. So this second sentence can be diagrammed SIP ! SNP (Sell non-co"ee products) or CSD (Co"ee sales decrease) In the third sentence, "will" tells us that a "decrease in overall profitability" is a necessary result of selling non-co"ee products (SNP), so we can diagram it SNP ! DOP LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section III, #22 • In the last sentence, we have "only if", which we know introduces a necessary condition, so might diagram it like this: • AVP (Avoid decrease in profitability) ----> ~CSD (Co!ee sales do not decease. But to do so would actually be, if you'll forgive the pun, non-profitable for us. Diagrams are useful only if we can make su"cient/necessary chains from them. If we diagram "avoid decrease in profitability" as “AVP,” that prevents us from connecting it to the “DOP” above. It's much better to diagram “AVP” as “~DOP”. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section III, #22 • So we have this: PCI ---> SIP SIP ---> SNP or CSD SNP ---> DOP ~DOP ----> ~CSD We can make this chain: PCI ---> SIP --> SNP! ---> DOP


June 2007, Section III, #22 • It looks like we cannot connect the last statement. But if we take its contrapositive we get this: CSD ! DOP and we have connected every statement in a full chain: • PCI ! SIP ! CSD or SNP ! DOP now that we have every statement connected in a chain, let's take the contrapositive of the entire chain. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section III, #22 • So the contrapositive of the whole chain is • ~DOP !~CSD ! and! ! ~SIP ! ~PCI • ~DOP ! ~SNP • The original chain was ! CSD ! DOP • PCI ! SIP ! or ! SNP ! DOP LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section III, #22 • Each of these chains are COMPLETELY logically equivalent. And, we know that, because we are searching for an answer choice that “follows logically” from the age, and because these chains contain every logical statement in the age, the answer must be at least part, if not the whole, of one of these chains. Let’s now take a look at the answer choices . LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Section III, #22 • A) is an bad reversal of the original chain, or we could say it’s a bad negation of the contrapositive chain • B) Another bad reversal • C) Is implied by our chains, so it is correct • D) mentions the price of co!ee beans decreasing, but ~PCI does not equal the price decreasing. ~PCI could be true and the price could stay the same. • E) Can be diagrammed thus: ~PCI ! CSI, but sales increasing was not a possibility in the age. to be careful with your negations. The opposite of sales decreasing is not sales increasing. Sales could stay unchanged. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Review of Lesson 2 • Well, that was a lot of work for just 5 questions. But , these were five of the hardest logical reasoning questions on the June 2007 exam. The point of this lesson was to show that even the hardest questions can be broken down and explained simply, or, in some cases, reduced to their logical essence through su!cient/necessary diagramming. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Review of Lesson 2 • Before next class, you should the exercises at the end of the lesson. • Often I hear students complain about diagramming: “I’m terrible at this, and you only pointed out three examples from the LR sections. I could have probably gotten one, maybe two of these without diagramming. Can I avoid diagramming on the LSAT?” Answer: “Just because something is di!cult, do not be dissuaded from doing it and you should practice these techniques. It is true, however, that you can survive on the LR without diagramming. But it is absolutely necessary for the Logic Games. Which we will cover in Lesson 3. Till then good luck. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Review of Lesson 2 Quick recap: Correlation vs. causation flaw Expert opinion flaw Su!cent/Necessary flaw “If,” “all,” “any,” “when,” “every,” “people who,” introduce su!cient conditions • “Only if”, “depends,” “requires,” “must,” “needs,” introduce necessary conditions • • • • •


Review of Lesson 2 • When doing contrapositives, “and” becomes “or” and “or” becomes “and” • Su!cient/Necessary conditional diagramming is common on Inference, Su!cient Assumption, Flaw, and the dreaded Parallel Reasoning questions, which we shall see in Lesson 13.


Diagramming exercises: diagram these and give the contrapositive • Only of the club may enter • You cannot be a salesman unless you have a good smile. • The city will fall if it runs out of food. • People who smile are happy. • In order to the test, you must study hard. • No men may the knitting group. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Diagramming exercises: • • • • • • • • •

Only of the club may enter: E!MC ~MC!~E You cannot be a salesman unless you have a good smile. S!GS ~GS!~S The city will fall if it runs out of food. ROF!CF ~CF!~ROF LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Diagramming exercises: • • • • • • • • •

People who smile are happy. S!H ~H!~S In order to the test, you must study hard. PT!SH ~SH!~PT No men may the knitting group. M!~JKG JKG!~M LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Three: An Introduction to Logic Games


An introduction to Logic • Logic Games – o!cially called “Analytical Reasoning” on the LSAT is one of the most daunting parts of the LSAT. We’ve all had to do Reading Comprehension on standardized tests before, and common sense is enough to get correct at least some of the Logical Reasoning. But who has ever had to group into departments the employees of a law firm, seat seven diplomats around a circular table, decide in what order Gupta, Henry, Ingrid, Jerome, Kiran, Leon, and Michah will view an apartment for rent, and rank contestants in a dog show, all in 35 minutes? LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

An introduction to Logic • It’s okay to fear Logic Games, but do not loose hope. Most students see the most dramatic improvement on Logic Games. I’ve had many students who started out barely finishing two of the Logic Games and who managed to get near perfect scores on them when they took their actual LSAT. Once you’ve mastered the major game types, and practices on as many games as possible, you will almost certainly notice a significant improvement where you started. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

An introduction to Logic • • • •

The major game types are: Basic Sequencing Advanced Sequencing Grouping


An introduction to Logic • Most games sections consist of one of each of the game types, with the fourth game a wild card – any other of these three, or potentially a strange, unclassifiable game. But don’t worry too much about that last category. We haven’t seen a really strange game since 2003. And the LSAT creators deliberately made the Games section easier beginning in June 2004 – they made the Reading Comprehension more di!cult, because they found that too many students were getting destroyed by the Games and acing the Reading Comp, so the LSAT authors wanted to restore some balance to the test. So if you’ve been looking at tests from before June 2004, you might be getting an inaccurate picture of what your actual Logic Games section will looks like.


June 2007 Logic Games • The test you just too had a game section that was rather unique. Let’s look at it now. The first game asks you to assign to assign to five places the digits 0,1,2,3, and 4. Because you must place one of five items – I like to call them characters – in one of five positions, or slots, this is very similar to a sequencing game, even if the rules don’t include instructions to place certain characters before, after, or next to one another. It’s a unique game, and we’ll discuss it briefly at the end of class. We’ll be spending most of our time discussing basic ordering games. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007 Logic Games • The second does not have a strict onecharacter-to-one-position correspondence. There are places – Thursday, Friday, and Saturday – where at least one and up to three characters can be placed. While games with days of the week usually are classified as ordering games, the main issue here is how the characters are going to be grouped, so we call this a grouping game. This game category is the most diverse of the three major categories and will be discussed in Lesson 8. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007 Logic Games • The third game tells us to schedule a cruise to one of four destinations in each of seven weeks. While there is not a one-characterto-one position correspondence, we are definitely dealing an ordering game, albeit one in which certain characters will go more than once. Let’s take a look at last game before we explore this game further. In the last game, we have three groups, the recycling centers, and five characters – the products that are recycled. So this is clearly a grouping game. Let’s now explore more deeply the third game. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Game III • Put your characters in a vertical line on the left, the rules to the right, and your setup to the right of the rules. • The rules: • The first two are “gift” rules • Third rule: M – G – M, but there could be another G, either within, or outside of, the two Ms. • 4th rule – formal logic! “J needs a G before it, but G could go alone. Don’t do a bad reversal and think that G always needs a J. • Last rule – diagram or ? • Deductions – basic sequencing, so keep deductions to a minimum LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Game III setup G J M T

M—G—M M=2 J! G J

~J

No consecutive characters

~T

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 T


June 2007: Game III questions • 11 – List question, grab a rule or test a choice? • 12 -- Global (Which) “Must be false” question, early in the game, should be answerable by deductions alone (if you misunderstood the conditional rule, you might have picked “E”) • 13 – Local (If) “Could be true” – start testing answers, focusing on the problematic “J” and learn from the wrong ones • 14 – Local (If) “Must be true” – do the deductions and find the answer. If you’re testing choices, you’re wasting time! • 15 – Local (If) “Must be true” – we can use our work from 14. Never erase good work, it can help us later on! • 16 – Local (If) “Could be true – we’re doing well, choose A and run with it! • 17 – Global (Which) “Must be true” – what have we learned? Use your work, and your knowledge of “problem characters” to find the answer quickly.


June 2007: Game I • Let’s now take a look at the first game, even though it’s an odd game: • The second digit is twice the first. Must be even, so must be 2 or 4. Can’t be zero. I know you math nerds out there know that zero is even, but it must be twice the first, and zero can’t be first and second. This means that the first position must be 1 or 2. • Let’s write out the two scenarios: ! 12 ! 24 LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Game I setup Now we can write out the possibilities in each of these scenarios. Digits!! 1 2 3 4 5 Characters! 1 2 0 3/4 4/3 ! ! ! 1 2 3 0 4 ! ! ! 2 4 0 1/3 3/1 ! ! ! 2 4 1 0 3 LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Game I • Now we can answer the questions in very little time. If you didn’t see that you could write out four scenarios and six possibilities quickly, don’t worry. You can do the questions using hypotheticals like we did in the previous game. Now let’s look at another Basic Sequencing Game, but in this game a vertical setup will work better for us. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2008, Prep Test 54, L M O R S V

S R S

|

O |

M L

~O ~M ~L 6 ~M ~L 5 ~L 4 ~S 3 ~O ~S 2 ~M ~O ~S 1

V = Random


June 2008, Prep Test 54, • 13: A • 14: If S is not immediately above 0, the only character that can come between them is V. So R could be immediately above V, so B is correct. • 15: Specific/character list question. You waste your time testing “Fifth” and “Sixth”. Start testing “Fourth.” It doesn’t work, so any answer choice with “Fourth” is wrong. E is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2008, Prep Test 54, • 16: The su!cient condition in the question requires this setup: " 6S " 5O " 4M " 3L " 2 V/R " 1 R/V So only B can be true. 17. In the possibility above, we can see V can be 1 and R can be 2, so B is correct. Let the work you’ve done already help you with later questions, especially questions near or at the end of the game. Never erase your valid hypotheticals!


Relative Ordering Games • These have become very popular lately. For example, there were two on the most recent (June 2011) LSAT • Let’s look at a game from September 2007, PT 52, Game 1.


September 2007, Prep Test 52, Game 1 Part 4


September 2007, PT 52, Game I setup G H I K L N O P

K P N G

I H—O—L

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I/L


September 2007, PT 52, Game I questions

• 1. E • 2. Just use your setup and count: there must be four characters after K, so it cannot be fifth. C is correct • 3. If I is second we have the following setup: ! 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ! K I L ! In this situation H cannot be fourth, because H must have K, P, and N before it. B is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, PT 52, Game 1 questions

• 4. If L is seventh, I must be eighth. We made this deduction, and when we make a deduction on a “Must be true/ Cannot be false” or “Must be false/ Cannot be true” question, we should scan the answer choices to see if our deduction immediately gives us the answer, B. • 5. Global question, just use your setup. E is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, PT 52, Game 1 questions

• 6. If K is fourth, P, N, and G must be in the first three slots, but we cannot determine their order. N could be second, however, and that is enough to get this question correct. Answer is B. • 7. If G is first and I is third, we have the following setup: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ! G K I P/N N/P H O L ! Answer is B. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game 2 • Second and third rules are tricky. • G is presented before J, or after L, but not both. • G – J or L – G, but not both? What does this really mean? If G is before J, then G is not after L , so it is really G before J and L • If the opposite is true and G is after L, then J must before G, so we have J and L before G. So really G is after both or before both.

• G–

J L

J L

or – G LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game 2 • Let’s say we reworded that last rule: G is either after J or before L, but not both. • G is before L, so its not after J, so we have G before both. G is after J, so it’s not before L, so it’s after both. So anytime we have a rule that says X is before Y or after Z, but not both, regardless of which preposition comes before which character, we can always say that X is before BOTH or after BOTH. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game 2 • Let’s think of a similar rule: V is before G or before P, but not both. If V is before G, it’s not before P, so we have P – V – G. If V is before P, it’s not before G, so we have G – V – P. So really when you have this rule, the result is P/G – V – G/P. • If the rule above had said, “V is after G or after P, but not both, the result would still be: ! P/G – V – G/P. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game 2 • So if the preposition changes “before… after” or “after…before”, the central character is before both or after both. If the preposition, stays the same, the central character is always between the two others. This approach helps us to quickly diagram these unwieldy rules.


December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game 2 G H I K L N O P

P–M–L J L G P

G or G J L G V or V P

~L ~M ~L

~P ~P ~M

1 2 3 4 5 6


December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game 2 • 6. C • 7. A • 8. If L is last, then it’s obviously after G, so J must also be after G. Answer is A. • 9. If J is before M, the latest J can go is fourth, so D cannot be be true and is therefore the correct answer. • 10. L must come after P and M, so it can never be first. C is correct. • 11. I messed up here, but caught it later in the video! See if you can figure out where. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game 2 • 11. When explaining B, I forgot that V could also be before G and P, and could go first. If you make a mistake like this, and find that none of the answers work, don’t panic. It doesn’t necessarily mean you’ve messed up the entire game. Just take a deep breath and try the question again. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson 3 Review • Basic Sequencing: pay attention to blocks, and heavily restricted characters (like “J” in the first game). If the setup is vertical, make sure it’s logical (i.e., floors of a building have 6 as the highest slot and 1 as the lowest). • Relative Ordering: these games have become very common lately, and learn that “before…after” rule shortcut. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Four: Logical Reasoning Main Point, Logical Completion, Method of Reasoning, and Role of Statement Questions


Main Point Questions • Every argument has a conclusion. Usually identifying the conclusion is easy. It’s often at the end of the argument, and there are keywords, such as “therefore, thus, so” which indicate a conclusion. We can also be on the lookout for keywords, such as “since or because” that introduce a premise, or evidence. Main point questions can be di!cult because the conclusion usually will be at the end of argument, and the conclusion might not be stated explicitly. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Main Point: June 2007, Sec III, • A, B, C, and D are true according to the age. A, B, C are all explicitly stated premises. D is the correct answer. It answers the charge of plagiarism by saying it is unlikely. It resolves the fundamental issue raised by the argument, a necessary condition of an argument’s conclusion. E is not the conclusion because the conclusion provides a judgment, not a conditional statement that can lead to that judgment. But E is what we would call an assumption, something not stated but that connects the evidence to the conclusion. We shall look at assumptions in depth in Lesson 9. Let’s look at another main point question. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Main Point: June 2007, Sec II, • B is the correct answer. It is a paraphrase of the second sentence. D and E are both true according to the age, but they do not address the argument’s central point. D is background information, and E goes on to the more general claim in B. The main point will not any other claim in the argument. It is the final logical point in the argument, even if it is not the last sentence. A and C have extreme language (“cannot”) in A and “only” in B, and so would not even be correct on “Must be true” questions. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Logical Completion: June 2007, Sec II, #8 • Most Logical Completion questions, like this one, ask for a main point. A is correct. The argument is not about popularity, so B is out. C is true, but not the main point. D is too extreme, as is E. It is almost always the case on the LSAT that any argument introduced by a claim put forth by some other group endorses will have as a main point a rejection of that claim. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Logical Completion: September 2007, Sec I, #13 • Note the conclusion is a rejection of the belief of “some paleontologists,” so the answer is E. • Also note how the argument uses an analogous, or similar, situation (that of modern crocodiles) to make its point.


Logical Completion: June 2007, Sec III, #16 (In the video, I mistakenly said it was • A is wrong because the argument does not mention the need to find new beliefs. B is the correct, the extreme language ed by the language “no nation can survive”. C is extreme. D and E are moral claims that use the word should, and while the argument discusses morality, it is not an argument that evaluates the world. The argument merely describes a situation in the world. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Logical Completion: June 2007, Sec III, #16 (In the video, I mistakenly said it was • The second sentence in the argument is actually a kind of conclusion, but not the main conclusion. We know it is a conclusion because it is introduced by the word “thus”, and is ed by the previous sentence. But it is not the main conclusion because the argument goes on to a further claim. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Intermediate Conclusions • These kinds of conclusions are called “intermediate conclusions” (in the LSATs in the 90s, these were sometimes called “subsidiary conclusions, but the LSAT has since dropped that term). Strictly speaking, a premise will be uned, just stated as a fact. Intermediate conclusions are a halfway point between the premises and the conclusion. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Argument Structure • So we have the basic building blocks of an argument: Premises and Conclusions. Some arguments have intermediate conclusions, and others have premises that do not directly the conclusion, but are there to provide background information or for rhetorical purposes. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Argument Structure • Be on the lookout for Logical Completion questions that do not ask for a conclusion, but for a premise. If you are asked to complete an argument, but right before the blank there is a “since” or “because” some other phrase that indicates a premise, the correct answer will be a premise. The conclusion will usually directly precede the blank. These are rare but they do occur. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Method of Reasoning and Role of Statement Questions • Now we shall look at two question types that involve distinguishing premises from conclusions and describing how arguments function. Method of Reasoning questions ask you to describe an argument, and Role of Statement question ask about the purpose of a particular phrase or sentence in an argument. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Role of Statement: June 2007, Sec II, #11 • This argument uses a historical analogy to make its point. The LSAT, I believe, would not call such an analogy direct evidence, so A, E, and D, the most tempting wrong answer, are all incorrect. In addition, A is too extreme (nothing is being “destroyed” here), E is just wrong (the claim is not “dismissed”). If there is a “general hypothesis” here, it is that technology just not destroy human intelligence, it alters it. But “inseparable” to too extreme, so B is out. C is the correct answer. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Role of Statement: September 2007, Sec III, #17 • B and D are very similar. Does the statement disprove Graham's premise or conclusion? The conclusion could still be true, but the statement clearly disproves the premise that a person is only truly happy when doing something. So B is correct.


Role of Statement: December 2007, Sec I, #14 • The phrase in question is definitely not a main conclusion - it is introduced by the word "since" so it clearly s the preceding point that "some governmental control in needed". But it is ed by what follows, so it is not, strictly speaking, a premise. It is an intermediate conclusion. Knowing this gets us to B and D. And the main point is the claim about governmental control, not a silly analogy about a toaster that the argument clearly rejects. So D is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Role of Statement: December 2007, Sec I, #11 • The claim about private corporations s the claim, the main idea, that public funds should pure research. When an argument tells us what “should” be done, that claim is usually the main point. So A is wrong. It doesn’t define “pure research”, so B is wrong. C is a highly critical answer choice, yet all the question types covered in this lesson are attached to good arguments, so we want to avoid critical answer choices for these types. And the claim does not “illustrate.” An “illustration” is an example, whereas the claim is a general one that s the conclusion. D is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Role of Statement: December 2007, Sec III, #10 • The question asks about the statement that begins with “some art collectors claim…” Almost always, such a phrase introduces an idea that the argument will reject. B is therefore correct.


Method of Reasoning: December 2007, Sec III, #24 • This question is really di!cult, because we have to decide whether the argument provided an “example” (in A) or an “analogy” (in C). It is actually an example, because the claim describes a situation in which more choices does not equal more freedom. D describes a flaw that we shall discuss in Lesson 10, but the LSAT generally uses good arguments for Role of Statement questions. Do not be critical unless asked to criticize! LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Method of Reasoning: June 2008, Sec II, #10 • Randi only partially agrees with Helen. She limits the scope of Helen’s claim, using her own analogy (“fiction is like a sitcom”), so B is correct. She doesn’t dispute Helen’s evidence (it is debatable whether we can even call such an analogy “evidence”), so we can eliminate A and E easily. Randi does not question Helen’s reasoning, so C is out. And Randi provides her own analogy, not an analogy to Helen’s example (to investments in one’s future), so D is out. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Role of Statement: June 2008, Sec II, #17 • A. “Solely” is too extreme. • B and C say that the claim is an “illustration.” But this claim is more than just an example, it is direct evidence for a more general claim. And the claim doesn’t illustrate that criteria for legal responsibility “includes” that for moral responsibility (in B) or that one can be found “morally responsible” for something even if one is not legally responsible (in C) LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Role of Statement: June 2008, Sec II, #17 • D and E are more promising, but the claim does not a claim about moral responsibility, so E is out. D is correct. ! (In the video I said that that main point was the claim described in D. That is actually an intermediate conclusion that s the main idea that moral and legal responsibility are di"erent). LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Four Review • Main point – look for keywords that identify conclusions (“thus, therefore, so”) and premises (“since, because”) • Look out for intermediate conclusions • Pay attention to arguments that use analogies • Don’t chose critical answer choices on Role of Statement or Method of Reasoning questions. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Five: Inference and Disagreement Questions


Inference Questions • Recall the problem we did in Lesson Two, June 2007, Section III, #22. The question asked for a statement that “follows logically” from the statements above. This phrasing is one of the many ways the LSAT asks for an answer choice that must be true. If a question asks you an “inference,” a “deduction,” or a “valid conclusion,” the question demands an answer that must be true. Let’s take a look some more Must be true questions from your book of ten prep tests. Let’s start with Prep Test 52, Section I, #5. Try this one on your own. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be True Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 52, • As you can see in the video the sentences come out rather awkward, and more importantly, there are no chains that can be built, so diagramming doesn’t really reward you here. Let’s take a look at the choices: • A) We don’t know if there are few, many, or any children under 6, so A is out. • B) This choice is correct. If there is a child under 6 in the neighborhood, then that child must be able to swim in Barton pool. He or she cannot swim between 12 and 5, when children under six are not permitted, or after 5, when only adults are allowed to swim. So this kid must be allowed to swim before noon, so we can conclude that the pool is open before noon.


Must Be True Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 52, • C) We have no idea whether the pool is more or less crowded before or after 5. Improper comparisons are often found in wrong answers. • D) We know that everyone is permitted to swim at some time during the day. We don’t really know if children will swim there. While D seems very likely to be true, it falls short of definitely being true. • E ) This choice is way o!. After 5 only adults can swim. 12-5, children 6 and above can swim, and as we learned in B, if there are younger children, the pool must be open before noon. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be True Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 52, • C) We have no idea whether the pool is more or less crowded before or after 5. Improper comparisons are often found in wrong answers. • D) We know that everyone is permitted to swim at some time during the day. We don’t really know if children will swim there. While D seems very likely to be true, it falls short of definitely being true. • E ) This choice is way o!. After 5 only adults can swim. 12-5, children 6 and above can swim, and as we learned in B, if there are younger children, the pool must be open before noon. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be True Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 53, • Here a little diagramming might help. There’s a very clear “if…then” clause at the end, and because L, K, and J are the only real conditions here, the K!J might be interesting. If there is K, there must be a J, and therefore L will be out, because we cannot have all three. But be careful. We can’t make a typical chain like K!J!~L, because J, on its own, is not su!cient to kick out L. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be True Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 53, • But we can create two diagrams that start with K: • K!J, and • K!~L • The contrapositive of the second (L!~K) brings us right to answer choice A. B, C, D, and E all could be true, but only A must be true. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be True Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 53, • The age has di!cult language, but using our knowledge of su!cient and necessary conditions, we can simplify the age to its core logical components: • Second sentence has an “unless.” , take what the unless refers to, put that in the necessary condition. Negate the other condition for the su!cient condition: • EF!CA148 (Economically feasible ! conduct above ~148 degrees) LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be True Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 53, • We then learn that only two substances could possibly conduct at such temperatures, but in the last sentence, we learn that these substances cannot do so. So the necessary condition above cannot be met, so superconductors will never be economically feasible. The answer is A. It’s a strongly worded answer choice, but the stimulus contains strong language that fully s A. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be True Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 53, • A note about di!cult and scientific language. • The language is this question is di!cult: there are technical , crazy temperatures, and weird substances. But at its core, the age is very simple. It presents a question: will superconductors ever be economically feasible? Without explicitly stating so, the age gives us enough information to answer this question, “No!” When the language is di!cult, usually the underlying logic will be simple. When the language is simple, the logic will usually be more complex. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be True Questions: June 2008, Prep Test 54, Section II, • Some = at least one; Most = 50% plus one ! • DC Some GH " Most WC are GH " GH ! HMF + CKP ____________________ " DC Some HMF + CKP " Most WC are HMF + CKP LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Quantifiers • If we are going to link a quantity term to a su!cient/necessary statement, that term must be in the su!cient condition of a su!cient/necessary statement. " • EL! GH, we can’t say that “Some elephants are domestic cats.” • If we can make diagramming chains, the correct answer will be one of those chains. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Quantifiers: Some/Most • ! ! ! • ! ! !

Most EL are N N!B ______ Most EL are B Most EL are N EL!S _______ N Some S LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com


Most A are LP Most A are LC ______ LP Some LC Most RM are A Most A are LCM _______ No conclusion can be drawn here LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com


Most A are LP Most A are LC ______ LP Some LC Most RM are A Most A are LCM _______ No conclusion can be drawn here LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Quantifiers: Some/Most • “Some men are not poets” does not equal “Some poets are not men”, because it is possible that all poets are men. • “Some” is reversible • “Some…not” is not reversible • “Some…not” = “Not all” • “Some men are not poets” = “Not all poets are men.” LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Most Strongly ed Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #18 • Instead of asking for a statement that must be true, this question asks for a statement that the stimulus “most s.” Instead of looking for an answer choice that is 100% true, you are here looking for the best answer choice. Most LSAT courses out there fail to make this distinction. They group both must be true questions and these “most s” questions under the same inference category, tell their students that both question types require an answer choice that is 100% true. Their motive is to give students a more simplistic view of the test, but such instruction is logically incorrect and can also hurt a student’s LSAT score. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Most Strongly ed Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #18 • Let’s look at the correct answer to find out why: • B) This answer would not be correct on a must be true question, because it is extremely di!cult to prove conclusively one’s “motives.” In fact, it is a common LSAT flaw to infer a person’s motive from their actual behavior. While it is true that the second sentence of the age, “Nothing brings more recognition” strongly suggests that “most researchers have substantial motive…” there are perhaps other factors, like scientific facts themselves, that lessen these motives. With a “most strongly ed” question, however, you don’t need to worry about proving your choice perfectly. You just need to choose the best, most probable choice. And B is it. Let’s look at the wrong answers. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Most Strongly ed Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #18 • A) We really can’t say whether the climate change deniers are providing faulty evidence. We only know that very few find evidence to their case. • C) Is too strong. In science, as on the LSAT, skepticism is always a virtue. The current evidence available s the global warming hypothesis, but it is far from conclusive. • D) Is also too critical of the global warming deniers. They might have o!ered alternative hypothesis, we just don’t know. Be very cautious of strong language like “not o!ered any.” • E) “Primarily driven” just because a motive exists does not mean it the main cause of a certain behavior. To make this claim is make a major cause and e!ect flaw, and we shall see plenty of these on the LSAT


Most Strongly ed Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #22 • There is a causal relationship here: the isolation of local politicians causes a reduced chance of resident participation eliciting a positive response, which discourages resident participation in local politics. Let’s take a look at the answer choices: • A) seems quite plausible. Let’s keep it for now. • B) “Should”, if you from Lesson Two, is the kind of word we find in moral claims. To a moral claim, we need language that tells us what is good, or right, or what we should do. There is no such language in the stimulus, so we “should” (if you’ll forgive the pun) probably look elsewhere. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Most Strongly ed Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #22 • C) “Most important”: perhaps the factor is important, but you should be very skeptical of superlatives in this question type, unless the stimulus contains a superlative. • D) This answer choice looks good too. Let’s hold onto it for now. • E) This answer choice reverses the cause and e!ect relationship. Eliminate it. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Most Strongly ed Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #22 • Now let’s compare A and D. A tells us that “particular acts” would be “likely to elicit a positive response.” D tells us that more coverage would reduce “at least one source” of encouragement. Not remove but reduce. If we are debating between two choices that both seem ed by the stimulus, we have to ask ourselves, which of these two has weaker, or easier to prove, language? In this case the answer is D. “Likely” is a di!cult word to prove. Not as strong as the superlative in C, but still problematic. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Inference Questions and Strong vs. Weak Language • When doing either kind of inference question (“must be true” or “most strongly ed”), and two answer choices seem very similar, always go for the answer choice that has weaker language. It’s much easier to prove “Some men are poets” than “all men are poets.” And even if we know that “all men are poets” it is still true that some men are. A strongly worded statement implies the truth of a more weakly worded statement. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Inference Questions and Strong vs. Weak Language • This concept can be di!cult to grasp at first. After all, if we know that “All men are poets” we might feel that it is incorrect to say that “some men are poets”. But “some” means “at least one.” It covers all the possibilities from one to all. If “some men are poets,” were not true, that would mean that no man is a poet. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Inference Questions and Strong vs. Weak Language • Some of you might feel that I am contradicting what I said in Lesson Two, that you can trust your common sense on the LSAT. You can and you must. But you also must learn to refine your thinking and to understand the precise meaning of certain key words. When you master this skill and refine your own intuitive reasoning, you can really start to rock this exam. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Inference Questions and Strong vs. Weak Language • Before we move any further, let’s talk about what makes language stronger or weaker. The weakest kinds of words are those that describe what is possible. Words like “could” or “might.” Also the word “some” is one of those words: “Some men are poets” and “If one is a man, one could be a poet” are, for the purposes of LSAT logic, completely equivalent. The two sentences might sound like they have di!erent meanings, but they both imply possibility, and thus are logically equivalent. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Inference Questions and Strong vs. Weak Language • Even though there is an “if” in the second sentence, we would not diagram it: we save “arrow” diagramming to describe those relationships that are modified by the strongest kinds of words, words that describe what must be true. “All” “every” “must”: the words that describe su!cient/ necessary relationships are much stronger, and thus more di!cult to prove, than those words that merely describe possibility. • Between these two extremes are words that describe probability: “likely” “usually” “most.” LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Inference Questions and Strong vs. Weak Language • Putting these together, we can construct what I like to call “the hierarchy of strength” ! • Words of necessity (all, every, must, always) • Words of probability (most, usually, likely) • Words of possibility (could, might, some) ! • We can do the same for words that tell us what is false: • Necessity (Impossible, Cannot, Never, None) • Probability (Unlikely, a minority – i.e., the opposite of most) • Possibility (Some…not, not all, could be false)


Inference Questions and Strong vs. Weak Language • With both kinds of inference questions, we prefer language that is weaker. As we have seen, many correct answers for must be true questions contain strong language that is correct because it is fully ed by the age, so in practice this technique is usually more useful on “most strongly ed” questions. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Most strongly ed – Sapin Whorf • With both kinds of inference questions, we prefer language that is weaker. As we have seen, many correct answers for must be true questions contain strong language that is correct because it is fully ed by the age, so in practice this technique is usually more useful on “most strongly ed” questions. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Most strongly ed – Sapin Whorf • A: There is a big di!erence between an unverifiable hypothesis and a false hypothesis. • B: Extreme language • C: Extreme language and an uned moral claim (“should”) • D: Correct. If this question were a Must Be True, I doubt we would have an non-measureable concept like “know” in a correct answer. It’s entirely reasonable to say that because something is unverifiable we cannot know whether it is true. But it is still a slight logical leap, one that we would not see on a Must Be True question. • E: Extreme language and an uned moral claim should LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be False Questions • In order to determine what must be false, we must first determine what must be true, and then find an answer choice that violates what must be true. In the following question, we are asked, “each of the following could be true EXCEPT:”. The opposite of “could be true” is “cannot be true,” which is equivalent to “must be false.” LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Must Be False: September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec I, #18 • The study in the age compared a smoker, who just had a cigarette, to a non-smoker, who might or might not have had a cigarette. The study demonstrated that the non-smoker had superior short-term memory skills.


Must Be False: September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec I, #18 • A) compares non-smokers who just smoked to nonsmokers who did not just smoke. Wrong comparison. • B) states that the non-smoker who just smoked has short-term memory skills superior to those of a smoker who just smoked. This choice violates the study in the age. It cannot be true, and is therefore correct. • C) compares a non-smoker to a smoker who hasn’t had a cigarette. Wrong comparison. • D) mentions a period of heavy smoking, which is not found at all in the age. • E) compares smokers who just smoked to smokers who smoked five hours ago. Another wrong comparison.


Disagreement Questions • The last topic we shall look at in this lesson is Disagreement Questions. These questions are often not discussed until the very end of an LSAT course, because they are newer question type and are quite di!cult. But they are a special kind of inference question, and I think it’s better to begin with the tough stu". These questions ask you for a claim with which one speaker would agree and with which the other speaker would disagree. One must say “Yes” to the answer choice, the other must say “No”. If there is a chance they could both say yes, or both say no, or if you are not sure what they would think, then that choice would be incorrect. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Disagreement Questions • The last topic we shall look at in this lesson is Disagreement Questions. These questions are often not discussed until the very end of an LSAT course, because they are newer question type and are quite di!cult. But they are a special kind of inference question, and I think it’s better to begin with the tough stu". These questions ask you for a claim with which one speaker would agree and with which the other speaker would disagree. One must say “Yes” to the answer choice, the other must say “No”. If there is a chance they could both say yes, or both say no, or if you are not sure what they would think, then that choice would be incorrect. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Disagreement Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #16 • First o!, note that Sandra completely drops the issue of non-verbal communication. On that basis alone we could eliminate A, B, and C .We have no idea what she would say to the claim that 61 percent of communication is through nonverbal signals. She is more interested in attacking Taylor’s bolder claim, that “all mathematically precise claims” are suspect. We can see now that D is correct, that Taylor would disagree with it, would say “no” to it, while Sandra would say “yes.” While Taylor seems to be generally antiscience, we have no idea whether he would agree with E. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Disagreement Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #16 • We can learn a great deal from Sandra’s argument. She attacks Taylor where he is weakest, where his argument is boldest and thus hardest to defend. She also provides insight into how the LSAT thinks: generally, the arguments on the LSAT are skeptical of bold claims in the social, or “soft” sciences, but believe that precision is possible elsewhere, such as in math or the physical science. As I’ve said earlier, we will not only be discussing question types and correct answers , but how the LSAT authors view the world. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Disagreement Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #16 • Sandra is actually a great teacher of argumentation. She attacks Taylor where he is weakest, where his argument is boldest and thus hardest to defend. She also provides insight into how the LSAT thinks: generally, the arguments on the LSAT are skeptical of bold claims in the social, or “soft” sciences, but believe that precision is possible elsewhere, such as in math or the physical science. As I’ve said earlier, we will not only be discussing question types and correct answers , but how the LSAT authors view the world. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Disagreement Questions: • A: Tova could agree with A. The argument is not about general trends but more about computers in general. • B: Too extreme for Samuel • C: Tova could agree with A. • D: They could both could agree wwith D • E: Correct. Samuel: computer replaces intimacy. Tova: there may not have been real social bonds for these people before they began to use computers. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Five Review • Inference Questions: “Must be true” correct answers are 100% true, “Most Strongly ed” correct answers are the best choice among the five. • “Some” = “at least one” • “Most” = “50% plus one” • To combine a “some” or “most” statement with a su!cient/necessary statement, a part of the “some” or “most” statement must be the su!cient condition of the su!cient/necessary statement LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Five Review • You can combine two “most” statements if the first part in each “most” statement is the same: • Most A are B ! Most A are C _______________ ! B Some C LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Five Review • Must Be False Questions: the correct answer must violate what must be true. • Disagreement Questions: one speaker must agree with the correct answer, and the other speaker must disagree with it. One will say “Yes”, the other will say “No.”


Lesson Five Review • All the question types we have done thus far are “ive” questions: the correct answer cannot do anything new to the stimulus, or have language that is stronger than that in the stimulus. • Must Be False and Disagreement questions need to contradict the stimulus, and the language must be strong enough to violate the stimulus, so they are not, strictly speaking, “ive” questions. But they are close, because we must know precisely what the age implies before we can choose an answer that contradicts the age. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Six: Strengthening, Weakening, and Paradox Questions


ive vs. Active Questions • Last time we went over Inference questions that both Must Be True and Most Strongly ed questions fall under the Inference category - I said at the end of class that these question types, as well as Main Point, Method of Reasoning, and Role of Statement questions, were "ive" questions, meaning that the correct answer is ed by the age. The correct answer should easy to prove, and while strong language is appropriate if the stimulus contains language that is similarly strong, the language in the correct answer can NEVER be stronger than that in stimulus. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

ive vs. Active Questions • Let's look at two di!erent question stems: " • Which of the following is most ed by the information above? " • Which of the following, if true, most s the conclusion drawn above? • " • They sound quite similar, but the first is a Most Strongly ed question, and I first came with the label ive because of the ive verb in the question. With a ive verb, the subject - like the correct answer for this question - isn't doing anything. The second sentence has an active verb, and it is therefore a very di!erent kind of question.


ive vs. Active Questions • It is a strengthening question, and the three question types we shall do in this lesson - Strengthening, Weakening, and Paradox - are all Active questions because the correct answer must DO something to the stimulus. While strong or extreme language was a liability with ive questions, it is an asset with Active questions. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: June 2007, Sec IV, #19 • If you didn’t choose A because you thought it was too strong, you were not thinking correctly for this question type. Anytime the question stem has the phrase, “which of the following, if true…” we want an answer choice that is as strong as possible. The argument’s evidence is that politicians promise to o!er governmental assistance, and that such assistance, because it involves taxation, is a form of governmental intrusion. If it were true that these promises are a good indicator of actual behavior, then this becomes a much better argument. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: June 2007, Sec IV, #19 • Of course, it’s not just about strong language, but about strengthening, or in other cases weakening, the author’s argument. A helps the argument because it makes the evidence more likely to lead to the conclusion – A tells us that the politicians’ promises will actually lead to action. When reading an argument, always look for gaps in the reasoning – and there is a big gap here between what a politician seeking political o!ce promises and what a politician actually does. A helps fill that gap and thus strengthens the argument. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: June 2007, Sec IV, #19 • There is another major gap in the argument as well. The argument states as evidence that taxes “can be considered a form of government intrusion.” But there are certainly other forms of government intrusion, such as government involvement in other areas of economy and criminalizing certain behaviors – it is certainly possible for taxes to be raised and to reduce these other forms of intrusion, thereby producing the net reduction in intrusion that the argument denies will happen. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: June 2007, Sec IV, #19 • It just so happened that the correct answer helped fill the gap between the first premise and the conclusion. But the correct answer could also have filled in the gap between the premise about taxes and the conclusion. The point here is that, while it’s ideal to analyze the argument in depth and think about the multiple gaps in reasoning, you can spend way too much time analyzing. Sometimes your analysis can lead you in the wrong direction, and lead you predict a correct answer that simply isn’t there. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: June 2007, Sec IV, #19 • You have to find the proper balance between picking apart the argument, trying to predict what a correct answer could look like, and actually deciding among the answer choices. You will achieve this balance through lots of practice. And sometimes, you just won’t see what the gap or gaps of reasoning are. If that occurs (and it will happen to all of us from time to time) simply move to the answer choices and see which one seems best. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: December 2007, Sec I, #1 • C does not strengthen, because the conclusion is “consumers should have a skeptical attitude.” That consumers actually have a cynical attitude doesn’t really help, because it doesn’t give us a reason why they should have such an attitude, it merely states that they do. Consider this argument: The United States should invade Greenland, because the US is invading Greenland. It’s a poor argument. Just because something is true doesn’t mean that it is right. We could also argue about whether “skepticism” and “cynicism” are the same – I think we can safely say that cynicism is a stronger form of skepticism. But it’s not that distinction that makes C correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: December 2007, Prep Test 53, • A gives us another reason why Moral Vacuum is similar to The Cruel Herd. It doesn’t strengthen as much as other correct answers for strengthening questions, but it the only answer choice that strengthens at all, so it must be correct.


Strengthening Questions: June 2008, Sec II, #24 • A tells us the high quality diets will yield much more milk and meet – so these diets could lead to fewer cows needed and even less methane produced. • B suggests there is no di!erence between di!erent kinds of cow food, so it might seem like a weakener, but actually it leaves the argument una!ected. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec II, • C is tempting – certainly it seems relevant that farmers be willing to use high-quality food. But the conclusion is a conditional one, an “if….then” statement. So we are not so concerned with the likelihood of the su!cient, but rather whether the su!cient condition would have that necessary result. • D points out a di"erence between milk cows and meat cows, but because the argument is about giving all cows a better diet, this choice neither strengthens nor weakens. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec II, • E is also tempting, because it makes methane seem more relevant to global warming than carbon dioxide, and thus makes the advantages of reducing methane production that much greater. But the argument is not about reducing global warming in general, but about reducing methane specifically. We are trying to strengthen the specific conclusion here, so an answer choice that broadens the issue too much will be incorrect. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #19 • A is tricky, because if we changed the language from “distressed urban groups” to “distressed rural and semi-rural groups” we would have a good strengthener, because A would be telling us that, in the preceding elections when there was no cause (“no addressing of distressed rural and semi-rural groups”) there was no e!ect (“national electoral victory”). That is a classic way to strengthen a cause and e!ect relationship, and this argument is definitely a cause and e!ect argument. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #19 • There are actually two causes here: ! 1) the Land Party’s focus on rural and semi-rural groups and ! 2) the economic distress these groups faced. The remaining, and wrong, answer choices all strengthen one, or both, of these two causes. • B s the first cause – the focus – and C and E the second – the distress. • D helps explain why the Land Party was successful in semirural areas. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Weakening Questions: December 2007, Prep Test 53, • Note that the correct answer – B – did not doubt the evidence that humans and cats have so much genetic information in common – it simply doubted that the genetic similarities had anything to do with the similar diseases.


Weakening Questions: December 2007, Prep Test 53, • Note that the correct answer – B – did not doubt the evidence that humans and cats have so much genetic information in common – it simply doubted that the genetic similarities had anything to do with the similar diseases.


Weakening Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec I, • In some cases, a conclusion can be countered by providing an unacknowledged advantage to a rejected course of action. D provides an advantage for worked-owned businesses, making them seem like a better investment. Thus, D most weakens the conclusion that lenders should not make loans to worked-owned businesses. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Weakening Questions: Alternative causes and the “Uber• There is a correlation between minivans and safe-driving. Therefore, minivans cause drivers to drive more safely. • Maybe not! Maybe there is some hidden cause that causes both the supposed cause (the minivan) and the supposed e!ect (safe-driving). In this case, maybe it’s a certain kind of person who chooses to buy a minivan AND who chooses to drive safely. I like to call this hidden cause the “uber-cause”. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Weakening Questions: June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec II, #14 • The conclusion says that the speed limit reduction caused the decrease in serious accidents. • A is tempting, suggesting that no one obeyed the new speed limit. But of course, if drivers got tickets for going 75 from 1981 to 1986 and for going 70 from 1986 to 1990, the number of tickets issued could have remained constant yet still the average speed decreased. • B might strengthen the argument, because fewer police patrols might mean less compliance with the new law. On its own, it has an uncertain impact on the argument, so it is incorrect. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Weakening Questions: June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec II, #14 • C suggests that the steady decrease in tra!c could be responsible for, over time, a decrease in serious accidents. It is the correct answer. • D tells us about accidents that do not appear to be serious, so it is incorrect. • E, like B, has an uncertain impact: I don’t know anything about what constitutes a serious accident after 1986, so I cannot tell if this choice strengthens or weakens. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Weakening Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #5 • B tells us that most of the e!ect (the warming) happened before most of the cause (the buildup of gasses). This is a version of a classic way to weaken a cause and e!ect argument: e!ect without the cause.


Weakening Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #14 • This weakening question is attached to an argument that itself weakens a cause and e!ect relationship – that heat kills the lysozyme – by proposing an alternative cause of microwaves. I think it’s easier to think of this situation as one in which you have to strengthen the original cause and e!ect relationship. • E provides information that shows how heat could actually be responsible, so it is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Weakening Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #9 • This weakening question is attached to an argument that itself weakens a cause and e!ect relationship – that heat kills the lysozyme – by proposing an alternative cause of microwaves. I think it’s easier to think of this situation as one in which you have to strengthen the original cause and e!ect relationship. • E provides information that shows how heat could actually be responsible, so it is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Weakening Questions: June 2007, Sec II, #9 • The argument assumes that something that occurred in the past (13 to 16 year olds purchased the vast majority of video games) will continue to occur. • Whenever an argument makes such as assumption, a good weakener is one that suggests that the future will be di!erent in some relevant way. E does just that and so it is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Weakening Questions: June 2007, Sec III, #15 • The argument assumes that two groups (one that has been in therapy for awhile and another that just started therapy) are similar enough for a legitimate comparison. C points out a major di!erence between the two groups, that those who have been in treatment for awhile might have, all along, felt that they were improving. C is therefore correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Strengthening/Weakening Questions: June 2008, Sec IV, #10 • D certainly does not destroy Erin’s argument, but it does point out that emissions are not the main source of PAHs in the environment, thus ing the claim that the regulations are not likely to save thousands of lives. D is therefore correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Two really hard questions : June 2007, Sec III, #12 • B and D are so similar. It took me years to finally figure this one out. The conclusion is about a therapy that “focuses” on changing conscious beliefs. D never mentions focusing on that which is under the patient’s conscious control, just “helping them”. D certainly suggests that unconscious therapy needs to do more, but B makes any therapy that “focuses” on conscious control superior to one that does not. So B is the answer. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Two really hard questions : September 2007, Sec I, #21 • I picked D, because I thought that it attacked the relevance of the evidence’s claim that the poems lack consistency. But I was wrong for two reasons. One is that it says that the poems internally are not “completely consistent.” But that does not imply that they lack internal consistency as much as the two di!erent poems do. Also, we are trying to weaken the claim that the poems are not by the same author. A possibility with D (as is probably the case historically) is that the individual poems are the work of multiple authors. That actually does not weaken the conclusion. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Two really hard questions : September 2007, Sec I, #21 • I rejected C because I didn’t like the use of modern authors to make inferences about an ancient author. But it has that key part of the conclusion – a single author doing roughly the same thing as the author of The Iliad and The Odyssey – that makes it a much stronger choice than D. You live and you learn. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Paradox Questions • Like most inference questions, paradox questions are not attached to arguments, but to a set of facts. Yet the facts will seem contradictory. Your job is to find an answer choice that explains why these two seemingly contrary facts can coexist. ! • Paradox questions are often introduced much later in an LSAT course, but I put them here because, like Strengthening and Weakening questions, they are Active questions that very often involve cause and e"ect reasoning. Your job is to resolve a paradox or explain a discrepancy – the greater explanatory power an answer choice has, the better it is. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Paradox Questions: September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec • A is too weak. If the heavy studiers scored better than “some students”, that is not that telling. some means “at least one”, so it’s not really strong enough to explain why the researchers would stick to their hypothesis. • C, by refocusing our attention from the students globally to individual students in each course, gives us a better picture of why the researchers would have that strange finding yet still stay with their hypothesis that studying improves a student’s grades. C is therefore correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Paradox Questions: June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec IV, #13 • A tells us that even though wind and precipitation erode high mountains, such extreme weather is in fact caused by high mountains, so this correlation is not so strange or surprising. A is therefore correct.


Paradox Questions (EXCEPT): December 2007, Prep Test 53, Sec • The paradox is that those who CAN distinguish red from green do not seem to be able to distinguish between di!erent kinds of red. • D tells us about those who CANNOT distinguish red from green. It is therefore not about the paradox we are trying to resolve. For this reason, it is correct because it does nothing. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Review Active vs. ive questions Strengthening Weakening Causal Reasoning and the Ways to Weaken or Strengthen a Cause and E!ect Argument • Paradox Questions • • • •


Lesson Seven: An Introduction to Reading Comprehension


Reading Comprehension • This section is studied the least, but you ignore it at your peril – there are always 27-28 questions in an RC section, the greatest number of questions in any of the three section types. While students often do not see the dramatic improvements that they can achieve in Logic Games, serious improvement is possible. If we learn about the kinds of ages there are, how best to read them, and how best to handle the questions, serious improvement is possible. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities • Humanities ages are very common on the LSAT, and for the last five years or so, nearly every humanities age has featured an artist from a minority or oppressed group. While in the past it was common to see ages about Homer, Byron, or some other dead white writer, these days the ages that have to do with the arts tend to feature an artist that represents some historically disadvantaged group. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities • When discussing the value of a work of art, authors will often return to a familiar debate: form vs. content. The form of a work of art is simply the work itself. Is it a novel, or a painting, or a sculpture? Of course, form is more complicated than that: is it a realistic painting, or is it an abstract work? The content of a work of art is the art's subject matter: a novel about war, romance, domestic life, etc. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities • So, if we are going to praise or criticize a work of art, we have to consider both its form and content. The minority artists that are the subjects of LSAT ages are almost always praised, and they are praised both as innovators with regards to their art's form, and as representatives of groups that formerly did not receive a great deal of attention in the fine arts. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities • In this first age, we learn about the poet Rita Dove. Unlike many RC ages about artists, her ethnicity and gender to not play a large role in the age's analysis of her work. What is most interesting for the author is how the poet confronts a general American tendency to insist on strict divisions with regards to literary genres. Let's take a closer look at the age. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities • Before we get started, I don't insist on one approach as far as taking notes, or highlighting, or just doing the analysis in your head. You don't want to take so many notes you have no time for the questions, but you also want to read actively and take from the age its most interesting points. I'll be pointing out what you need to take from the age to answer the questions most e!ectively LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities • A good approach to get started is to is to note key parts of the age with some abbreviations: “MP” for main point; “WR” for the wrong arguments that the author, or in this case, Rita Dove, will confront; “C/E” for any cause and e!ect relationships; and “DIS” for any major distinctions LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities First Paragraph • As we have seen with many Logical Reasoning questions, an author will often introduce an idea or argument, and even if the author does not criticize it directly, it's pretty obvious the author is not a big fan. Unless the author specifically endorses an idea, the author will usually come out against it. The detached tone is a good indication that the author doesn't like this "rift" or "separation" between fiction and poetry. "Conventional wisdom" is another phrase that suggests the author doesn't like this "separation." LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities Second Paragraph • More of the same, though the author does try to explain this situation: US culture, which casts a "suspicious eye" on the generalist. So we have our first cause/e!ect relationship - the e!ect is this “rift” and the cause is a American mistrust of accomplishment in multiple fields. In case you are wondering, a dilettante is someone who participates in many fields but is not particularly good at any one of them. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities Third Paragraph • Third paragraph: we meet our hero, Rita Dove. Note how the author's tone has gotten much more positive: this "bias" is "diminishing", Dove is "highly acclaimed." Even as she criticizes, she does it "gently" so Dove is cool. The author likes her, and we must understand that fully in order to succeed on the questions. One important note is that Dove is not alone - she is part of a "recent trend." Also, we have the example of German literary culture, which isn't as specialized and restrictive as that in America. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities Fourth Paragraph • We finally have some details about her work - we learn that her poetry features "lyrical narrative" - the narrative part is the fiction element - and her fiction is lyrical - and therefore poetic - because it has "poetic rhythms" and "elliptical expressions". In a paragraph like this, it's easy to get lost in the details, particularly if you are not familiar with literary terminology. If you notice that you are ever getting lost in the details, just note the basic contents of the paragraph so in this case we would say, "Here is where the writing is actually described." LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities Question #1 • Main Point: we should have a pretty good idea of what the main point is before looking at the choice: it should say something like "Rita is good because she blends genres." We don't want too specific choices that have lots of detail. That gets rid of A, B, and C. So we are left with D and E. Both are true, but E is more complete because it includes the fact the Rita is part of a larger trend. E is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities Questions #2, 3, 4 • 2. D is the only choice that contains blending of genres. It is therefore correct. • 3. Here we are describing the wrong view, so we got to the first two paragraphs. C is tricky here, but it's not that poetry is excluded - it is always separate. A is the best choice, we can find evidence for it in the first paragraph.! • 4. Author's perspective: seldom are they "perplexed, astonished, or ambivalent." the author clearly doesn't like the rift, but has optimism that it is being overcome. E is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: First age – Humanities Questions #5, 6, 7, 8 • 5. This question involves the cause and e!ect relationship I called attention to earlier. If we made note of it, D would be an easy pick. • 6. D is tricky here, but it's just too much. On RC, the questions are primarily ive. When in doubt keep it simple, and that should take you to B." • 7. Here we find in the last paragraph for A. The author is pretty clear that the fiction is fiction and the poetry is poetry; they each combine elements of the other, but the genres are clear. • 8. Maybe E is true, but A is much less bold. As with 6, keep it simple, and opt for weakness over strength. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Second age – Dual age • There's a good reason to start with June 2007, other than that it's free, and here it is: the dual age, which was introduced in June 2007. It was one of two major changes to the scored portion of the LSAT in the last 20 years. The other is reducing the di!cultly of the Logic Games and increasing the di!cultly of RC in June 2004 in the last 20 years." • I like them. A dual-age breaks up the monotony of reading four long ages. Whenever you spot disagreements between the ages think about your studying of disagreement questions - you can be almost certain that a question will focus on that di#erence. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Second age – Dual age (age A) • First paragraph: states a question which we can be certain will be answered. • Second paragraph: makes a major distinction between music and language. • Third paragraph: states the thesis that “music has little adaptive value.” LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Second age – Dual age (age B) • First paragraph: Darwin is obviously a major figure in the history of evolution, but blind allegiance to authority is always suspect in science and on the LSAT. Luckily, Author B tells us quite clearly that he believes that music played a large roll in evolution, so we have a clear di!erence between the ages. • Second paragraph: Like age A, age B has a more technical second paragraph which details some specific research. The author focuses on primitive mother-infant interactions which he/she says have "musical elements". LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Second age – Dual age (age B) • Third paragraph: highlights a common theme in human evolution - the increased time in maternal care. During this period of maternal bonding, musical interactions could strengthen emotional bonds, which would have "conferred considerable evolutionary advantage" another way of saying that the musical and emotional interactions could help a child have greater success in survival and reproduction. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Second age – Dual age, Questions •

• • • • •

9. What do the ages both try to answer? age A says music says is an accident of evolution, age B says it's vital part of human evolution, but both ages try to answer the question in answer choice C. 10. Only age B mentions choices A and D. Only age A mentions choices C and E. They both mention choice B, so answer choice B is correct. 11. Answer choice D states clearly the two authors’ fundamental disagreement. 12. We need them to agree here: they both mention brain size in each final paragraph. Note that C is quite measured "at least partly" – we prefer a weaker choice if we need both authors to agree. 13. Both look at modern-day humans, so E is correct. Note the strong language in the wrong answers A ("must“), B (“all“) C, (“IS evidence”), D ("essence“). 14. Both ages disagree and use di!erent evidence. Only choice A says that clearly.


Reading Comprehension: Cause and e!ect vs. distinctions • At some fundamental level, the second age, like most that are about science, was about cause and e!ect: what is the cause of human beings' ability to produce music? As is common today in the wider intellectual culture, LSAT ages often try to explain essential human behaviors through evolution – that evolution can explain musical ability is actually a shared assumption of both these, and many other, LSAT ages. Where these two ages di!er is music's importance in evolution - was it, as was the case in age A, a by-product of the development of language, or did it contribute significantly, and independently of language, to our species survival, as was argued by age B. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Reading Comprehension: Cause and e!ect vs. distinctions • The first age we covered today, the humanities age, was more about distinctions than cause and e!ect. While there was one major cause and e!ect relationship the cause of the rift between poetry and fiction in the U.S. - the age was primarily built around major distinctions - the distinction between poetry and fiction, between poetic and fictional elements in Dove's work, between European and American literary culture, and between a newer trend toward mixing genres, a trend exemplified by Dove, and the tradition of specialization. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Reading Comprehension: Legal ages • Legal ages, too, are more about distinctions than cause and e!ect relationships. Legal arguments are, after all, all about putting actions into categories: was an act illegal, or unconstitutional, or grounds for a civil lawsuit? Answering such questions is what makes up the bulk of legal argument, and LSAT legal ages are no di!erent. • The third age from June 2007 is about applying a legal category to a certain internet practice. It's a timely topic, one the LSAT, and the wider contemporary culture, loves. (You should begin to start seeing that the LSAT is not some strange document concocted by logical aliens, but actually reflects our wider culture. Yes, it reflects our wider intellectual culture, so chances are you won't hear about Charlie Sheen, Kim Kardashian, or Michelle Bachman on the LSAT. But, as it is written by academics and other people who make a living thinking and writing, the LSAT cannot help but reflect the wider intellectual culture.)


June 2007: Third age Legal age • First paragraph: if you honed in on "Some of these owners of intellectual property claim...." you're doing great. Of course, we have the counter argument of the Web s immediately after. Which argument to you think the author will side with? • , that the "some people think" introduction is usually a prelude to a rejection on the LSAT. And note the language had a much more positive tone ("open, interactive medium") when describing the web s’ argument. So, my bet is that the age will endorse the web s. The LSAT authors are not Pirate Bay/ Anonymous internet-anarchist collectivist types, so there will surely be some acknowledgement of the need to protect content owner's interests. But it definitely seems like the age is going to side with the web s.


June 2007: Third age Legal age • Second paragraph: the most important part is the question. Answering this question constitutes the main point of the age. Also note the analogy and the awareness of the analogy's imperfection. • Third paragraph: another analogy, and the argument by analogy leads to the conclusion that the document owner actually controls the document, so the one who providing the link is not guilty of copyright infringement. Don't get caught up in the details of the answering machine analogy. Just be aware that it leads to the answering of the question posed in paragraph two, and therefore s the age's main point. Note that that author allows for some restriction on web freedom in the form of s, so the author isn't totally against the property owners. Also the author answer's another argument, that o!ered by the property owners in the first paragraph that copyright laws should be made more restrictive, or "strengthened" - the answer is clearly “no.”


June 2007: Third age Legal age – Question #15 • A deals with the fundamental question posed by the age and gives us the answer to that question, so it is the main point.! • B gives us a necessary condition for changing the law, but the author never advocated changing the law. • C is true, but a smaller point limited to the third paragraph. • D is also probably true, but too wishy-washy for a main point. • E is tempting, because it involves the other big idea in the age, that the law should not be changed. On LR, the main point will never go on to another point. But RC is more complicated. The main point, that the linking is not infringement, does seem to this other claim that the law should not be changed. But because the bulk of the age, and the analogy that lay at the heart of the argument, concerned the question of whether or not linking was infringement, we have to say that A is the main point. But it is easy to be tempted by this one.


June 2007: Third age Legal age – Questions #16-18 • 16. A is correct. To “strengthen” copyright law is to make it more restrictive. • 17. A and D involve changing the law, and the author is against that. • B - too strong. While protection might limit the Web's potential, I'm not sure that it would be significant. • C is too strong: "impossible." • E is correct. • 18. Choose a proper analogy: • B reminds me of prohibition, but it’s still wrong • C Relying on personal responsibility as opposed to government intrusion and greater legal restriction. So C is correct!


June 2007: Third age Legal age – Questions #19-22 • • • • • • • •

• • • • •

19. “Most strongly ed” question – strong language can kill an answer choice. A "no"? B Correct! C "privacy"? D "primary control" E "must be physical"? 20. E is correct. 21. D is correct. It basically says that the analogy leads the author to his conclusion, which it does. The purpose of analogy is not to broaden the scope of the argument, and involve other kinds of media or bring up new legal debates, but to provide a similar situation that favors the author's intended conclusion.! 22 A is crazy B It’s not the linkers, but the authors who control a document. C Nothing here about profit, so it’s not in the scope of the age. D Correct! E: "should be changed“ is completely wrong!


June 2007: Fourth age History age • Many of the LSAT history ages, like this one here, involve accessing non-traditional sources for historical research. Instead of reading the memoirs of kings or generals, a creative historian might look at oral histories, letters from nonelites, or minutes from union meetings. Some recent LSAT ages, like this one here, have focused on using nature itself as a source to learn about changes in agricultural practices. History and hard science blend in this age. (History ages usually deal more with cause and e!ect - but not so much here, because the age isn't trying to explain historical change, but more show the potential of a new kind of source). LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Fourth age History age • First paragraph – the limits of traditional history, especially when dealing with agricultural societies! • Second paragraph – pollen as a document to learn about changes in human activity and natural events • Third paragraph – cereal pollen suggests successful cultivation prior to seventh century • Fourth paragraph – flax pollen corrects a mistake historians have made • Fifth paragraph – the limits of pollen analysis LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Fourth age History age: Questions • 23 A: the potential of pollen. This choice is correct. • B: There is no new work with documents • C: Pollen analysis cannot distinguish species • D: Pollen analysis proves that flax was not cultivated until recently. • E: "severely limited" too strong LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007: Fourth age History age: Questions • • • •

24: 25: 26. 27:

The The The The

answer answer answer answer

is is is is

B. D. E. C.


Review • Humanities ages usually feature a minority artists going against the grain. • Science ages feature cause and e!ect relationships, and evolution is a very common LSAT topic. • Dual ages: look for similarities and di!erences between the ages. • Legal ages: pay attention to distinctions and arguments by analogy. • History ages often feature new kinds of historical sources. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Review • Most Reading Comp questions are “ive” questions • Read for tone! • Start to learn how the typical LSAT author “thinks”.


Lesson Eight: Grouping Games


June 2008, Prep Test 54, Game 1, (In/Out Game) Men:

F G H

J ! ~L L! ~J ~L! J ~J! L Women: ~F! ~J J! F J J or K or L ! G K ~G ! ~J + ~K L + ~L H= Random

If J is on the stage: S: J, F, G ~S: L If L is on the stage: S: L, G ~S: J


June 2008, Prep Test 54, Game 1 Questions • • • • •

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

C D E. C. C.


June 2007, Game 4 (Three-Group Game) G N P

T W

W! N ~N!~W C2 ! C1 ~C1 ! ~C2 P! ~G G!~P P=1

T= Random

…..

C1 ___ ___

~P C2 ___ ___

……

C3 ___ ___

……


June 2007, Game 4 Questions • • • • • •

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

B D C D B A


December 2007, Game 1 (Three-Group Game) T W X Y Z

Z <--> Y Ts ! Ws ~Ws ! ~Ts

~Y F _X_ …… P ___ …… S ___ ……

No Random LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game 1 • • • • •

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

A B B A E


September 2007, Prep Test 52, Game 2 J K L S T V

Jm!Lp ~Lp!~Jm ~Km!Vo ~Vo! Km ~JK ~LS ~TV

M ___ ___

O ___ ___ ~T P ___ ___

No Random LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Prep Test 52, Game 2 • • • • •

8. B 9. E 10. A 11. D 12. C


Review • In/Out • Two groups • Three groups (when one of the groups is filled, one can create dual-options for characters that cannot go together).


Lesson Nine: Assumption Questions


Necessary Assumptions • Here are some examples of necessary assumption question stems. ! • “The commentator’s argument relies on which of the following assumptions?” • “The o"cial’s conclusion logically depends on which of the following assumptions?” • “Which of the following is an assumption made in drawing the conclusion above?” • "The author assumes....” • All of these questions are asking you to find an answer choice that contains a required assumption of the argument. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Necessary Assumptions: The Negation/Denial Test • The denial test allows you to confirm that you’ve chosen the right answer choice. The test is very simple: just negate the answer choice you’ve chosen. The negation of the correct answer must weaken the argument. While it certainly isn’t e!cient to negate every answer choice, the denial test can be extremely useful when debating between two tempting answer choices. • Let’s consider the following argument: • Joe is a Canadian. Therefore, Joe probably likes jazz. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Necessary Assumptions: The Negation/Denial Test • Let’s say we want to find an assumption of this argument. We can use the denial test to evaluate the following two competing assumptions: • a) Some Canadians like Jazz. • b) All Canadians like jazz. • Both of these choices connect the evidence (“Joe is a Canadian”) to the conclusion (“Joe probably likes jazz.”) !But only one of them is a necessary condition, i.e., an assumption, of the conclusion.


Necessary Assumptions: The Negation/Denial Test • Let’s negate statement A first. Be careful: “Some Canadians do NOT like jazz” is NOT an actual negation of the original statement. Negations must contradict the original statement. The statement “Some Canadians do NOT like jazz” does not contradict the statement “Some Canadians like jazz.” In fact, the two statements are compatible. The negation of “some” is “none”, so the negation of Statement A should actually be, “No Canadian likes jazz.” This negation clearly destroys the argument. If not a single Canadian likes jazz, then it is definitely flawed to conclude that Joe probably does. Looks like this Statement A is our answer — but let’s check Statement B with the Denial Test just to be sure. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Necessary Assumptions: The Negation/Denial Test • Be careful: the negation of “all” is NOT “none.” Clearly, “none” contradicts “all”, but when doing negations, we want the weakest possible statement that contradicts the original. If I wanted to disprove the second statement, I would not need to learn about the musical tastes of every Canadian. All I would need would be one Canadian who did not like jazz, and I would have proved the claim false. So the negation of “All” is “Not all Canadians like jazz” or “Some Canadians do not like jazz.” These statements do not destroy the argument, because they still allow for the possibility that a majority of Americans like country music and that the conclusion about Joe is a reasonable one. Therefore, statement B isn’t a correct assumption. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Necessary Assumptions: The Negation/Denial Test • You should learn common logical negations: • Some vs. None • All vs. Not all (or Some....not) • Could vs. Cannot • Must be true vs. Not Necessarily True • Most vs. 1/2 or less (a minority) • Your negation should always a!ect the main verb (or quantity word if the subject is modified by such a word) in a sentence. Any subordinate clause should remain untouched. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Necessary Assumptions: The Negation/Denial Test • A good approach is to simply say to yourself that the sentence to be negated is not true. So if the original sentence was, "Rebecca shall soon rule the world," say to yourself, "The statement ' Rebecca shall soon rule the world' is untrue." You then must think about what that means. Does it mean that she shall never rule the world? No, but it does mean that she will not be ruling the world anytime soon. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Necessary Assumptions: The Negation/Denial Test • Two points more points: • While it's true that the test writers often use extreme language to make answer choices wrong, sometimes extreme language is justified. Consider this argument: • Rose likes the rock band MC5. Therefore Rose must like the rock band The Stooges. • "All those who like MC5 also like the Stooges" is an assumption of this argument. Why? Because the argument concludes, solely on the basis that Rose likes MC5, that she must also like The Stooges. If we negate the assumption, and claim that "SOME of those who like MC5 do NOT like The Stooges," the argument falls apart. • Do not just automatically eliminate an answer choice because it has extreme language. If the conclusion has extreme language, extreme language is permissible (and will probably be) in the correct answer.


Necessary Assumptions: The Negation/Denial Test • When you negate a weak statement, you get a strong one. Consider this statement: • Some of those who like MC5 also like The Stooges. • The negation is "No one who likes MC5 also likes the Stooges." This negation contains extreme language, but it clearly destroys the argument above, and so the original statement would also be an assumption of the argument above. • So NEVER consider extreme language a dealbreaker in the negation of an answer choice. Because weaker statements yield stronger negations (and vice versa), extreme language in a negation is actually quite awesome. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Su!cient Assumptions • Here are some examples of su!cient assumption questions: • "Which of the following, if true, allows the author's conclusion to be properly drawn." • "The author's conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed to be true?" • We would never see the words "if true" in a necessary assumption question, because in a necessary assumption question, the truth of the answer is implied by the conclusion. In su!cient assumption questions, the answer can me much stronger than the conclusion - as long as it does the job and makes the conclusion perfect, we've got our answer. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Distinguishing Necessary and Su!cient Assumption Questions • Let's look some questions’ wordings and see if you can tell which ones are su!cient assumption question stems, and which are necessary assumption question stems." • "The author's conclusion follows logically only if which one of the following is assumed to be true? • "The author's conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed to be true? • Which one of the following assumptions is required for the author's conclusion to be valid?" • Which one of the following assumptions requires that the author's conclusion to be valid?" LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Su!cient Assumptions • Su!cient assumption questions often involve conditional diagramming, and sometimes even almost math-like quantity problems, because it's pretty di!cult to make a perfect argument unless it has clear "if...then" statements or some mathematical logic to it. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Su!cient Assumptions and Conditional Reasoning I."A " ____ :Correct Answer is A!B, or ~B!~A " B II." A!B " ____ :Correct answer is A!C, or ~C!~A " A!C LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Su!cient Assumptions and Conditional Reasoning: Four Common Formulas III.A!B " _____ :Correct answer is C!A, or ~A!~C " C!B IV. A!B " " C!D : Correct answer is B!C, or ~C!~B " ____ " A!D LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Distinguishing Necessary and Su!cient Assumption Questions • Let's look some questions’ wordings and see if you can tell which ones are su!cient assumption question stems, and which are necessary assumption question stems." • "The author's conclusion follows logically only if which one of the following is assumed to be true? • "The author's conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed to be true? • Which one of the following assumptions is required for the author's conclusion to be valid?” • Which one of the following assumptions requires that the author's conclusion to be valid?” LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Distinguishing Necessary and Su!cient Assumption Questions • Let's look some questions’ wordings and see if you can tell which ones are su!cient assumption question stems, and which are necessary assumption question stems." • "The author's conclusion follows logically only if which one of the following is assumed to be true? (Necessary) • "The author's conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed to be true? (Su!cient) • Which one of the following assumptions is required for the author's conclusion to be valid?“ (Necessary) • Which one of the following assumptions requires that the author's conclusion to be valid?“ (Su!cient) LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Assumption Questions: June 2007, Sec II • Sec II, #13 (Su!cient): Quantity Problem. • Answer is C, the only choice that gives any sort of quantity information about (“all”) L and M. • D only has information about L, and about what L was made from, and so is not relevant to the conclusion. • Sec II, #15 (Su!cient) • Answer is D. C seems good, but because the conclusion mentions a new vaccine “each year”, we need “each” or “every” year in the correct answer. • Strange, no Necessary Assumption Questions in this lesson. "


Assumption Questions: June 2007, Sec III • " " " " " • "

Sec III, #5 (Su!cient) Evidence: Dumping Site Conclusion: Not bringing food Assumption: Dumping Site ! Not bringing food Sec III, #9 (Necessary) If the tiger DID move away, the argument falls apart. Answer is D. Sec III, #11 (Necessary) If the process to preserve birds DID substantially decrease the mercury levels in birds, the argument falls apart. Answer is E. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Assumption Questions: June 2007, Sec III • Sec III, #17 (Necessary) ! Evidence: Healthy Back !Balanced Muscle

Development ! Conclusion: Healthy Back !Exercise opposing sides equally ! Negation of B says that there is no reliable connection between balanced muscle development and exercising the opposing sides of one’s back equally. So this negation destroys the argument and therefore B is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Assumption Questions: September 2007, Prep Test, Sec I • Sec I, #10 (Necessary) ! Negation of A (“The plan will NOT be implemented before the end of next year.”) destroys the argument, so A is correct. ! !

Sec I, #17 (Su"cient) ! AP!R ! _____ ! AP!~P Answer is R!~P, or E. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Assumption Questions: September 2007, Prep Test, Sec I • Sec I, #20 (Su!cient) • The evidence is about how some neurons connecting brain regions are less well developed than others. The conclusion is about the influence these brain regions have one each other. Only C and E connect “neural development” to “influence.” But C mentions the brain region with the “most highly developed" connections. But the evidence is comparative, so C does not succeed in connecting evidence to the conclusion. E is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Assumption Questions: September 2007, Prep Test, Sec • Sec III, #7 (Necessary) • Conclusion is about "speech acquisition" and is very strong ("only.“) We can allow, and probably expect, a strongly worded answer choice. • A) Only answer that mentions "speech acquisition" and its strong language is allowed because we have strong language in the conclusion. • Sec III, #9 (Necessary) • Evidence is about listening to di!erent kinds of recordings pre-surgery, how those who listened to music required less help to reduce the pain of surgery, and the conclusion is about how reducing stress lessens a person's sensitivity to pain. But there is nothing about "stress" in the evidence. This missing element must be in the correct answer. C connects music to reducing stress. If it were not true, this argument falls apart. C is correct.


Assumption Questions: September 2007, Prep Test, Sec • • • •

•

Conclusion: First sentence ("should“ often indicates a conclusion) Intermediate conclusion: earnings of those whose lives are saved would increase GNP, and their taxes would increase government revenues. Typical prephrase might be that trauma centers are expensive, and the cost in treating would be greater than the revenues earned by those whose lives are saved. ! This prediction would lead us to C, but the negation of C does not destroy the argument. Treatment in trauma centers could me more expensive than treatment elsewhere, and still it could be better for the economy overall. The negation of D simply tells us that, even if citizens of X get specialized treatment, there will be no net increase in employment: those that have died will be replaced on the job, and the argument falls apart, because there will be no overall increase in revenue. Note that the negation of D attacks the relationship between the premise that treatment centers would save lives and the intermediate conclusion).


Assumption Questions: September 2007, Prep Test, Sec • • • • • • • " " • • • •

Su!cient The negation of “rapid emergence” equals “cannot emerge quickly.” Repeating , so diagram! RER = rapid emergence from a recession NI = new investment CEP = confidence in economic policies CBI =collective before individual goals RER ! NI NI ! CEP _________ CBI !~RER You can solve this as I did in the video, or take the contrapositive of combined evidence: ~CEP ! ~RER Answer CBI !~CEP, or D.


Assumption Questions December 2007, Prep Test 53, • • • • • • • • •

#9 (Necessary) The evidence is about nesting female leatherback turtles. The conclusion is about the entire population of leatherback turtles. For the argument to be a good one, nesting female leatherback turtles must be representative of leatherback turtles generally. So the answer is A. #13 (Necessary) The evidence states the drug caused no significant change in a three month trial. The conclusion states that the drug has no e!ect. “No change ! No e!ect” would complete the argument, and A is the contrapositive this statement. Note that in 9 & 13, the correct answer is both necessary and su"cient. We can stay that they are necessary because they contain no language than is stronger than that in the conclusion.


Assumption Questions December 2007, Prep Test 53, • Necessary • B) If crushed limestone did NOT stay in the soil long enough to neutralize some of the top layer's acidity, then crushed limestone would not make the soil less acidic, and would therefore not make the soil more attractve to earthworms. The negation of B destroys the argument, and so it is correct. • C) Limestone might be good for other reasons, but the conclusion is about earthworms. We always must consider the specific conclusion. The conclusion isn't just a general "Limestone is good", but "limestone would make the soil more attractive to earthworms."! LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Assumption Questions December 2007, Prep Test 53, • Necessary • B) If crushed limestone did NOT stay in the soil long enough to neutralize some of the top layer's acidity, then crushed limestone would not make the soil less acidic, and would therefore not make the soil more attractive to earthworms. The negation of B destroys the argument, and so it is correct. • C) Limestone might be good for other reasons, but the conclusion is about earthworms. We always must consider the specific conclusion. The conclusion isn't just a general "Limestone is good", but "limestone would make the soil more attractive to earthworms."! LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Assumption Questions December 2007, Prep Test 53, • Su!cient • Argument by analogy: lions and tigers have same skeletons, but di"erent hunting behavior. Therefore, we cannot infer that certain dinosaurs with same skeletons had same hunting behavior. # • We need an answer choice that connects what we know about lions and tigers to dinosaurs, or to animals in general. C does that, so C is correct. • D is a common kind of wrong answer for Su!cient Assumption questions. It says, “If the conclusion is true, then the evidence is true.” But we already know the evidence is true, so D does nothing to help the argument.


Assumption Questions December 2007, Prep Test 53, • Necessary • Evidence is about “robust crops” withstanding insect attacks. ! • Conclusion is about “good soil” preventing insect attacks. • Correct answer will connect “robust crops” to “good soil.” ! • D is correct: “Crops grown in good soil tend to be robust crops.” leads to good crops. Note that the language strength of the assumption – “tend to,” matches the strength of the conclusion: “a better way.”


Assumption Questions December 2007, Prep Test 53, • 8: A) If there are NO bacteria in these landfills converted to public parks, then the evidence is completely irrelevant to human health, and therefore the argument is destroyed. A is correct. • B) This choice can be diagrammed: Damage health ! Toxic Vapors + Human Exposure. The negation is that “health could be damaged without toxic vapors and human exposure.” Sure, health could be damaged by a faulty sea-saw, so the negation of B does not destroy the argument and is not wrong. • C) This choice is tempting, but its negation does not destroy the argument, because the choice is about “vapors”, not necessarily “toxic vapors.” • D) Weakens the argument, and the negation ("measures cannot be taken") strengthens is, so this choice is clearly wrong. • E) "Any landfill" is too broad.


Assumption Questions December 2007, Prep Test 53, • •

• • • •

•

15 (Necessary) The correct answer is E. The negation of E: “If retirement age ceases to be 65, NO one will work past 65.” The negation makes the injustices cited impossible and the conclusion completely useless. 20 (Necessary) Conclusion: ability of mammals to control their internal body temperature is a factor in the development of their brains and intelligence. Evidence: last clause! The negation of C is “The brain COULD intelligence…“. This looks like is might weaken the argument. But the argument is about the development of intelligence, not the of the intelligence. The negation of D: “The development of intelligence in mammals IS INDEPENDENT...”. This negation destroys the argument, and so D is correct.


Assumption Questions June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec II • 2 (Necessary): correct answer is E. • 6 (Necessary): correct answer is C. • 9 (Necessary): correct answer is A. The negation of A: “ALL of the museum’s employees are paid significantly more than the minimum wage.” • 13 (Su!cient): • ~OPC!EGB " __________ " ~BQ+~LP!EGB Correct answer is ~BQ+~LP!~OPC, or answer choice B. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Assumption Questions June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec II • 26 (Su!cient): • GOB!PDO leads us to the correct answer, D.


Assumption Questions June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec III • 3 (Necessary, and not covered in video): The conclusion has a strong word (“any”), so the “any” in the correct answer, A, is justified. • 7: (Necessary): The correct answer is D. • 18: (Necessary): The evidence is all about the "mass audiences" and the correct answer, C, is the only one that connects “mass audiences” to “maximizing profits.” E is incorrect because the argument is not about what a studio’s goal should be. The conclusion of the argument is “If a studio’s goal is to maximize profits….” • 22: (Su!cient): Answer is B. • 24 : (Necessary). If answer choice E were not true, and almost 60, or more than 60, new buildings were built, the argument falls apart. "


Review • Necessary Assumptions: ive Questions • Use the negation test! • Su!cient Assumptions: Active Questions • Plug the answer into the argument, and learn the diagramming formulas. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Ten: Flawed Reasoning


Flawed Reasoning Questions • With flawed reasoning questions, we come to the heart of LSAT logic - we have been strengthening and weakening and finding assumptions of bad arguments. Now we're going to talk about reasoning in the abstract. Here is where the LSAT gets the most philosophical, and, in my opinion, the most fun. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec II, #4 • Bias is worth noting, but it not su!cient evidence that the claim made by a biased source is false. This flaw falls under the category of source arguments, where one does not engage with the argument's evidence, but with the source of the argument. If an argument claims that its opponent is biased, or immoral, or has been wrong in the past, and contains no other evidence, it is a poor argument. • The answer is A. • The argument probably does do what is stated in E, but I don't think it's flawed to assume that a PR department would not approve a negative report. The LSAT is a reality-based test, and making incredibly obvious assumptions is not considered flawed reasoning.


June 2007, Sec II • #17: Expert flaw! Refer to Lesson Two. • #21: Cause and e!ect flaw! Refer to Lessons Two and Seven.


June 2007, Sec III, #4 • Conclusion: posters will not boost productivity. • Evidence: employees are already productive. ! • Flawed assumption: Because they are already productive, posters will not make them more productive. • A is incorrect, because it is about corporations currently NOT using these posters. The argument is about corporations that have already begun to use these posters. E is the answer LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Two kinds of flawed reasoning questions

• You might notice at this point that some of these flaw questions have abstract language in their answer choices. "Infers a cause from a mere correlation" or confuses su!cient and necessary conditions" would be abstract language. Elsewhere, as in the last question, the answer choices began with phrases like "fails to consider the possibility that" or "takes for granted that". In these questions, the flaw is specific to the question and not an abstract flaw category.


Two kinds of flawed reasoning questions

• We can think of these questions as Necessary Assumption/Weakener hybrids, because any answer choice that begins with "fails to consider" or "fails to exclude the possibility that" is really giving you a claim that, if the answer choice is correct, would weaken the argument. Any answer choice that begins with "presumes" or "takes for granted that" is really giving you a claim that, if the answer choice is correct, is a necessary assumption of the argument. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec III, #8 • This is actually a Weakening Question. Even though the question has the phrase "most vulnerable to criticism", it also has the phrase "fails to consider the possibility that." The correct answer will weaken the argument by giving us a specific claim relating to the content of the argument, not some abstract flaw. • E is correct. • One note: The correct answers here will be implied by the argument. They won't be other possibilities drawn from other, analogous situations, as is the case with the Weakeners we have look at thus far. So even though these are weakening questions, when they are introduced with this kind of question stem, I put them in the ive category. Hence, they are ive Weakeners.


June 2007, Sec III • 18 is unique in that the flaw comes between the premise and the intermediate conclusion. This is rare, but it happens from time to time. • Answer is D. • 23. The flaw is the making the assumption that a selfish motivation implies an unreliable promise • A describes a bad negation (or “half-contrapositive”) of the flawed assumption: a selfless motivation implies a reliable promise. D is the answer. • Watch out for Answer Choice A. It’s where the test writers love to put tempting choices. But don’t assume it’s always wrong: it’s still right almost 20% of the time. • 25. We've seen this in Lesson Two: Su!cient/Necessary flaw!


September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec I ! • 2: This argument has a cause and e"ect flaw. It might not be the napping causing the insomnia, but the insomnia, or lack of sleep, causing the napping. Answer is D. • 6: The argument has a flawed assumption: “consistency implies accuracy.” Answer is E. • 23: Just because Megan’s reading reduces the time she spends with other children doesn’t mean that her reading “detracts from her social development.” D clearly describes the flawed manner in which the application applied the principle. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec III, #4 • This argument has a flawed assumption that popular magazines do not find articles that contain valid research. • B is correct. • C is too specific an assumption. • D would strengthen the argument. • What are A and E? LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec III, #4: Straw Man • Answer choice A would be correct if the argument distorted an opponents argument and presented a counter-argument that actually did not attack the original. This flawed strategy is generally called a "straw man" argument. • Consider this argument: “My opponent wants to withdraw from the war in Greenland. Therefore, he s the terrorists in Greenland. “ • This argument is what we call a “straw man” argument. There may be other reasons to withdraw from a war in Greenland. Maybe the country is losing the war, maybe fighting a war there is counter-productive, maybe it’s creating more terrorists than it stops. Whatever the case may be, the conclusion drawn above is clearly flawed, as it distorts the opponents position and makes it easier to attack.


September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec III, #4: Circular Reasoning • E describes a flaw called circular reasoning. Consider this argument. • I'm the best LSAT teacher, because I'm the best LSAT teacher. • It might seem logically valid, because if the premise is true, so is the conclusion. Circular reasoning is the one kind of technically valid reasoning which is considered flawed, because it is not an argument. Any decent argument has the potential to be falsified. But there is no way to challenge my argument. It assumes what it seeks to prove, and is therefore flawed. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec III, #4: Circular Reasoning • • • " " " " •

Circular reasoning can appear in a slightly more tricky form: ! My student all do well on the LSAT, because those students who did not do well were not actually my true students. We could diagram it thus: ! ~DW ---> ~MS ! ____________ MS ----> DW ! Here we have the contrapositive as evidence for a logically equivalent conclusion. This argument is another example of circular reasoning. The LSAT might describe this form of circular reasoning thus: "The argument precludes the possibility of disconfirming evidence." This argument is also unfair, because there is no way to disprove it. Those students who did not do well, potential counterexamples to my claim, are disqualified from being real evidence.


List of flaws • A and E were incorrect here, but other arguments in other questions might contain those flaws. Let’s look at the flaws we’ve seen so far:! • Su"cient/Necessary • Cause and E#ect • Improper appeal to experts. • Straw Man • Source Arguments • Circular Reasoning LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec III, #8 • The argument in 8 contained this flawed assumption: “government did not do what was to everyone's advantage, therefore it acted immorally.” (I'm paying more attention to the immoral rather than the ine!cient claim, because that it the more serious logical leap. that moral claims must be ed by other moral claims for an argument to be completely valid.) A is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec III • 12: There will probably still be biases among historians even if historians make the proposed shift in emphasis • Answer is D • 16: Argument assumes that the hospitals are similar in many respects. So the correct answer should point out a major di!erence. • C is correct. • B describes a su"cient/necessary flaw, but there is no su"cient/necessary language, so it cannot be correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Prep Test 52, Sec III, #21 • The argument assumes that the two groups - those who fear and those who do not - are roughly equivalent. But maybe those who parachuted ten times are a di!erent kind of person, perhaps particularly fearless people. Maybe they parachuted ten times for a reason, and those who feared after one time will never get over their fear. It's a reasonable consideration, and E gives it to us, so E is correct. • B: Of course it would be good to consider all kinds of parachuters, but there is a more serious flaw in this argument. No argument can consider every piece of evidence in the world, so it's a pretty weak kind of objection.


December 2007, Prep Test 53, Sec I, #12 and “Equivocal • This question doesn't look like a flaw question. But it's clear Jack committed a flaw and misunderstood what Melinda meant. Melinda meant that insurance lessened the risk because if a disastrous event occurs, one need not experience financial disaster. But Jack thought she was talking about the actual risk of the event itself. C is correct. • When a word or concept is used twice in an argument - or pair of arguments - in two very di!erent ways, we call this "ambiguous word usage." The LSAT sometimes uses the phrase "equivocal language" or states that the argument "equivocates with respect to a central term or concept.” The word equivocate - you can see the root "equal" - means to make two things that are unequal, equal. It does not mean, however, to seek equality for an oppressed group; i.e., to “equivocate” is not good. To equivocate is always a logical flaw, and it appears on the LSAT to describe ambiguous word usage.


December 2007, Prep Test 53, Sec I, #18 • ! ! •

Suc ! CB 3yrs ! CB __________ Suc ! 3yrs

• To weaken, we need to show that success is possible without three years in the business. If a client base is necessary for success, then if we can show that one does not need three years to get a strong client base, we weakened this argument. B does the job. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, Sec I, #18 • The evidence is comparitive: it discusses what is “healthier.” The conclusion is absolute. It discusses what is su!cient to be “healthy.” E is correct. • Answer choice A doubts the evidence, so it’s not a flaw in the argument. • Answer choice B describes the flaw of equivocation, but the meaning of “healthy” never changes. • Answer choice C is too broad. • Answer choice D describes a su!cient/necessary flaw, but such language appears only in the conclusion. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, Sec III • 2. C • 6. D. • 17. Each strand works together, so if one breaks, the strength of the case is relatively una!ected. The argument presumes that because each piece of evidence works together, they are equally important. • A: This choice describes that flawed assumption. You can use negation technique to prove its correctness. • B: The argument never made that assumption. • C: I think lawyer would agree with this. • D: While it's true that an argument by analogy can be suspect, the lawyer did o!er some for the analogy. • E: It’s not a circular argument.


June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec II • 5: Su!cient/necessary flaw. B is correct. " • 15. Humans may be rational - they may possess such a capacity - even if they don't always show it. E is correct. • 19. Computer is a distraction. The flaw is simply to assume that the past equals the future. D is correct. • 22: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. E is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2008, Prep Test 54, Sec II • 4: Events can have multiple causes. The answer is D. ! Not the circular reasoning in E. • 14: Su"cient/Necessary Flaw. D is correct. • 16: Evidence: there will be incentive ! Conclusion: It's going to happen. # ! The answer is A. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Review of flaws • Su!cient/Necessary reversals • Cause and e"ect: ignoring potential alternate causes, assuming that a certain e"ect only has one cause • Ambiguous word usage (equivocal language) • Circular reasoning • Illegitimate appeal to experts • Assuming that a flawed argument proves the opposite conclusion is true (“absence of evidence is evidence of absence”) • Source arguments (ad hominem) • “Straw Man” arguments LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Eleven Reading Comprehension II


September 2007, Prep Test 52, age 1 (Humanities) • • • • • •

1. E 2. E 3. A 4. D 5. C 6. A LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Prep Test 52, age 2 (Dual age) • • • • • •

7. D 8. B 9. A 10. C 11. B 12. D LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Prep Test 52, age 3 (Science) • • • • • • •

13. C 14. E 15. Question Removed 16. D 17. E 18. B 19. A LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, age 2 (Legal) • • • • • • • •

7. D 8. A 9. C 10. E 11. D 12. B 13. B 14. A LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Lesson Twelve: Advanced Sequencing and Hybrid Games

And a brief discussion about skipping games


December 2007, Prep Test 53: ! ! Game III setup S T V W X Y Z

W—S X Z– V

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sus T W C/~CY/Z S ~C C C ~C ! ! LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53 Game III Questions • • • • • •

12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

B E A E A D


! June 2008, Prep Test 54: Game IV setup H J K R S T

Acc = K/R; 2/3 H–

J K

1 2 3 4 5 6 ! ! J S T 1 2 3 4 5 6 R/S

J! LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2008, Prep Test 54, Game IV Questions • • • • • •

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

B A B D C A


June 2008, Prep Test 54, H I N Q R S

H N

4 3 ~Q 2 ~Q 1

I H/R S = Random


June 2008, Prep Test 54, • • • • • • •

6. A 7. A 8. D 9. E 10. D 11. E. 12. B LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game IV

High G F I G H H

M P

Student G M N O P S T

S

P I N

High Student 1 ___ T___ ___ 2 ___ ___ ___ 3 ___! ___ ___ !


December 2007, Prep Test 53, Game IV • • • • • •

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

E A B C D B


Skipping Games • Almost always, skip the third or fourth game • Decide which game is easier, but also consider the number of questions.


Lesson Thirteen: Parallel Reasoning and Principle Questions


Parallel Reasoning • Parallel Reasoning questions are the nightmare, the black hole, the bete noire of the Logical Reasoning section. While there are only 2, maybe 3 per section, and they are usually the best problems to skip if you have to, there is still tremendous value is studying them to learn more what the LSAT considers good, bad, and parallel reasoning. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec II, #2 • We learn in the question stem that this is a flawed argument, so the right answer must be similarly flawed. The LSAT always tells you when they think it’s a flawed argument, so if you are simply asked to parallel the reasoning, then it’s a good argument. • (In some pre-91 tests, the question stem did not necessarily indicate whether the argument was good or bad. But that’s been the case for the last 20 years, and I don’t expect it to change). LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2007, Sec II, #2 • So what’s the flaw? Rosa combines two extreme kinds of dogs, and the conclusion is that her dogs will be moderate barkers. It’s a flaw to think that a cross-bread, or any kind of combination, will simply average out the qualities of originals. ! • The argument in A is flawed. The “somewhat” doesn’t necessarily carry over from how hard she studies, to what kind of grades she gets. But it’s not the same kind of flaw, in which extremes are combined to create an average. • B is correct. • C and D contain good arguments, so they are both wrong. • E: If we knew that the dresses in the closet were all Keisha’s or Connies’s, this argument would be a good one. It’s flawed, but in a di"erent way from that in the stimulus.


June 2007, Sec II, #12 •

• • •

This one is much harder. Pay attention to the conclusion, which states that two obligations cannot always be met – the obligation to keep a promise and the obligation to answer all questions truthfully. Look for an answer choice that tells us that two actions cannot both be done. A is the only one that does this, so A is correct. B has a “some” in the conclusion, but we need a “cannot be true”. The strength of the conclusion in the correct answer must match that in the conclusion of the stimulus. C, D, and E all deal in specifics, but the original argument dealt with general principles. And none of these choices have the “two actions cannot be done.” Some of you who have taken other LSAT courses might have been scared by A, because the content seems so similar. It’s true that sometimes the test tries to trick you by including in wrong answers content similar to that in the stimulus – though the test writers don’t use this trick very often any longer. The content in A is similar – but if the argument is about moral principles, a parallel argument will also be about moral principles.


June 2007, Sec III, #20 • What’s the flaw here? It’s a “source” argument. The argument concludes that because certain people might have di!erent economic interests than us, their argument must be wrong. It’s attack on the people in the local historical society, not their argument. C contains a similar flaw, so C is correct. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

September 2007, Sec I, #16 • • ! ! ! •

• •

It might seem like a good argument, one that applies contrapositive logic. ET ! UFO ~UFO _________ ~ET But that diagram ignores the idea of “belief.” Maybe all those who believe in ET believe in UFOs, but the non-existence of UFOs does not imply the non-existence of ETs. It doesn’t really matter what people believe in a question of scientific logic. The correct answer must be flawed in a similar way. B and C mention what “you” believe, and so do not discuss what actually exists. E is close, but reverses su"cient and necessary. In the stimulus, the UFOs, in the necessary condition of the first claim, the entity that was proven not to exist in the evidence. But here the su"cient condition is shown to not exist.


September 2007, Sec I, #16 • That leaves us with A and D, which are very similar. When in doubt, always focus on the conclusion. The stimulus’ conclusion says that the “belief is false.” In A, we have “unicorns do not exist.” These are of similar strength. D, however, says that a belief is unjustified. Here we have a classic LSAT, and logical, distinction – just because we have no reason to believe something, or an “absence of evidence,” doesn’t mean we have reason to believe that it is false. That distinction is enough to make A much more similar to the argument in this stimulus than is D. A is correct. (Apologies to all those who believe that UFOs, Extra-Terrestrials, unicorns, and centaurs exist. But if think that there is any hard evidence to these beliefs, you probably shouldn’t be taking the LSAT.)


September 2007, Sec III, #24 • ! ! ! ! ! •

It’s almost like a half-, bad negation. UF ! EB ~UF ________ ~EB. Just be careful that the strength of the conclusion in the answer choice matches the strength of the conclusion in the stimulus. Just as we have in the stimulus’ conclusion, it should be a probabilistic word (unlikely, not usually, probably, etc.). The correct answer is C. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Sec I, #21 • " • " " " " •

Su!cient/Necessary words in the stimulus. Diagram! # AR > 5 ! TBM AR > 5 ! RF ~RF __________ ~TBM # Let’s diagram A:

" " " "

GP ! SF GP ! PBS (so far, so good!) ~PBS ______________ ~SF

•

Exactly the same. On test day, pick A and move on. But let’s look at the other choices.

•


December 2007, Sec I, #21 B: • " " " " •

! B2M ! JOT JOT ! LI B2M ________ LI Good argument. B is wrong.

• • " " "

C: Good argument. C is wrong. MO ! ~EF FPD ! EF _________ ~FPD ! ~MO

•

Bad argument with a similar flaw, but not as close as A. D is wrong.

•

E: Good argument. E is wrong.


December 2007, Sec III, #23 • Species can survive, as long as change is not too rapid. So threat is not from cutting down trees, but the rate. ! • This is a cause and e"ect argument that weakens a purported cause (the cutting of trees in general) by arguing that it’s some aspect of the that purported cause (the rate) which is actually to blame. Here’s a similar argument: public education is terrible! Look at all the problems with urban schools!! • It’s not public education itself, but the concentration of poor students in certain schools. • D is correct.


June 2008, Sec II, #21 • ! ! !

Most dogs are cuddly. Most dogs bite. ___________________ Therefore, some things are cuddly also bite.

• If the first two parts of the “most” statement line up, we can conclude a “some” statement. Even if one of the statements was an “all” statement (“All dogs bite.”) LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2008, Sec II, #21 • ! ! ! •

Most MSA are PDC _______________ PDC likely MSA " A good conclusion would have been, “therefore Jane, who su#ers from migraines as an adult, was prone to depression as a child.” But you cannot flip a most statement around to then get a conclusion about probability.

• A is the correct answer. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

June 2008, Sec II, #23 • ! ! ! • • • ! ! ! • • • •

MSM ! MM MM ! 20% ____________ MSM ! 20% "It’s a good argument in the stimulus. The correct answer must contain a good argument. A: FDA ! R FPL ! R ________ FDA ! FPL "Bad argument! A is wrong. B: First sentence: R + FIR ! DA Already it’s nothing like the stimulus. So B is out (though it’s kind of funny that the argument feels the need to tell us that her fridge is in her apartment.)


June 2008, Sec II, #23 • ! ! ! •

FDA ! R R ! PLW _________ FDA ! PLW "C is correct.

• ! ! ! • • ! ! • •

FDA ! R R ! PLW _________ PLW ! FDA "D contains a bad argument (a su#cient/necessary reversal). PLW ! R PLW ! A ________ FA ! FR E contains a bad argument (the conclusion here should be “Some R’s are A’s”.


June 2008, Sec IV, #8 ! • • • • • • • •

What’s the flaw? It’s assuming what is true of the whole is true of its parts. Ex: The Springfield Atoms are the best baseball team in the league. Therefore, they have the best shortstop in the league. ! A: This seems like a good argument, so it’s incorrect. B: Perhaps this is a good argument. It’s certainly not as flawed as the stimulus. C: This choice contains the same flaw as does the stimulus. C is correct. D: It seems likely that the book is good, and in any case, this argument goes from part to whole, the original argument went the other way. E: This choice contains a good argument, a good application of su"cient / necessary logic.


June 2008, Sec IV, #25 • !

FD ! E + S E or S ! FSD

! ! •

___________ ~FSD ! ~FD"

• !

EP ! UD + SE T6M + ~SE ! UD

! ! •

__________ EP ! T6M"

•

E ! WL + WK

! ! • •

WL or WK ! SBD ___________

This choice contains perfect contrapositive logic. So the correct answer must contain the same.

A contains a bad argument. It is therefore wrong.

SBD ! ~E B contains a bad argument. B must be wrong.


June 2008, Sec IV, #25 !! • " " " • • • " • • • " " " • •

GA ! RH + LA RH or LA ! CGB _____________ ~CGB ! ~GA Same as stimulus. On test day, choose C and move on! ! DW ! H or OMR H ! MBS On the questionable assumption that the beautiful scenery can only be seen on the way to Weller, D contains a good argument. But there is no contrapositive logic, so it’s definitely wrong. ! DIC ! FR + IC IC or FR! CLP ___________ ~DIC ! CLP ! E contains a # contrapositive, i.e., a negation without reversal.


Principle Questions • Our last major question type is Principle Questions, and they are a great way to end, because they include within them many of the other question types we’ve studied. Some principle questions give you a principle in the stimulus and you have to choose an answer choice that best follows that principle. These are similar to inference questions. Others give you an argument in the stimulus and you have to choose an answer choice that describes the principle the argument most likely invoked – usually the question stem here asks you for a principle the argument “conforms to”. These questions are very similar to necessary assumption questions. These two principle questions would fall into the ive question category. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Principle Questions • Other principle questions simply ask you for a principle that strengthens an argument, an some older principle questions asked you for a principle that is su!cient for the argument’s conclusion. These two question types fall into the Active question category. • What separates Principle questions from the other inference, strengthen, and assumption questions is that the answer choices – or, in the case of the inference type, the stimulus – will contain more general statements than the other question types. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Principle Questions • Let’s say we had this argument. • The United States is a wealthy nation at risk of defaulting on its debt. A default would damage the prestige of the nation. It leaders, therefore must do everything in their power to prevent a default. • A strengthener could be anything: • “A default would also cause mass unemployment.” • “United States leaders have a responsibility to work to prevent actions that would damage the nation’s prestige.” • A principle strengthener, however, would be much more broad in scope: • “The leaders of a wealthy nation must do whatever they can to prevent anything that would damage the nation’s prestige.” • The principle could apply to any wealthy nation, but it applies as well to the specific argument above.


June 2007, Sec II, #7 • Principle/Inference • Unlike most principle questions, this question stem doesn’t contain the word principle. But clearly the ethicist has a principle – and the word principle is used in the stimulus, so this question definitely falls into the principle category. So which one of these people is motivated by abstract principles, not self-interest or societal norms. A: Bobby just wants to look generous. Wrong! B: Wes just wants his employer to like him. Wrong! C: Donna didn’t even do the right thing. Wrong! D: Jadine acted against her own self-interest because of her beliefs. Correct! • E: Leigh acted because she was pressured by her colleagues. Wrong! • • • •


June 2007, Sec III, #14 • Principle/Conforms • Conclusion: universities should use only open-source software. • Evidence: open-source software, better than proprietary software, matches the values the embodied in academic scholarship, which are central to mission of universities. • Note the “should” in the conclusion. Principle answer choices will often provide the missing link between the descriptive evidence and the moral, or prescriptive, conclusion. Whenever we see the phrase “most closely conforms to” in the question stem, we are dealing with a principle question very similar to a necessary assumption question. Answer choices that are too strong are wrong. While the negation technique doesn’t work 100% of the time of these, in most cases the negation of the correct answer will destroy the argument.


June 2007, Sec III, #24 • • •

•

Strengthening Principle Here we have an Active Principle question. The correct answer will probably be much broader than the argument itself, but it will apply. This argument contains an assumption that should remind you of a common LSAT flaw. The argument concludes that romantics are wrong, that people are born evil and not made evil by institutions, on the basis of the fact that institutions are just collections of people. So the argument assumes that the parts determine the whole. A relevant objection would be maybe the whole determines the parts, and that people born into institutions are made evil by them. E weakens this objection. On strengthening principle questions, when in doubt, go for the more abstract, broader answer choice. The whole point of principles is that they are wider in scope than the specific content of the argument.


September 2007, Sec I, #8, ! • • • • • •

• •

8: Principle/strengthening – C is correct. 19: Principle/strengthening. Influence is what matters, and in E we have the most direct connection. ! 22: Principle/inference – diagram! WT ! T + ~D ID or WT ! L If you had an answer choice that said that Joe told a true statement with no intention to deceive, and he is therefore wholly truthful, that, though it seems perfect, would be wrong. When just given necessary conditions for a judgement, you can never actually make that judgement. You can only say one or both of the necessary conditions were missing and that therefore the su"cient condition is untrue, in this case, someone is not wholly truthful. When given necessary conditions, take the : D or ~T ! ~WT The correct answer is D. Walter intended to deceive and is therefore a liar.


September 2007, Sec III ! • • • • • •

1: Principle/conforms Correct answer is D. 11: Principle/conforms Correct answer is D. 25: Principle/conforms Correct answer is A. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Sec I, #17 • 17: Principle/conforms • The stimulus describes how correlations do not necessarily imply causal relationships, and how it might be one phenomena causing two e!ects. This stimulus is discussing what I call the uber-cause. the Driver from Lesson Two. He mistook correlation for causation, ignoring what was in fact a very likely uber-cause: that he was simply a reckless driver. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

December 2007, Sec III 12: Principle/strengthening Correct answer is B. 18: Principle/conforms Correct answer is E. 25: Strengthening (It’s not really a principle question, because the answer choices are not principles, and you are not choosing an answer that can be inferred from a principle. But this question is often, I would argue, mistakenly classified as a principle question. In fact, I made the same mistake when preparing these videos. Sorry!) • The correct answer is C. • • • • •


June 2008, Sec II & IV • • • •

Sec II, #18: Principle/Conforms Correct answer is C. Sec IV, #9. Principle/Strengthening Correct answer is A.


Review • Parallel Reasoning • Skip if you need to, but study them! (A great way to practice your diagramming skills) • Pay attention to the conclusion. The correct answer’s conclusion must match in strength the stimulus’ conclusion. • Principle Questions: • Inference (ive): very often can be diagrammed • Conforms (ive): similar to Necessary Assumption questions • Strengthening (Active): correct answer broader than that of a regular strengthener LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Review of Prep Test 61


Logical Reasoning I • • • • • • •

2. E 7. D 10. A 11. A 13. B 14. D 15. B LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Logical Reasoning I • • • •

16. 17. 18. 19.

C A A D


Logical Reasoning I, #20 • •

•

•

20. Probably the hardest question of the test, and it’s a really tough Weakening question. C is the correct answer, but D and E are very tempting. D: Sometimes EKG readings are not enough for either a computer or a cardiologist. This choice, however , doesn’t make a cardiologist seem better, or equal to, a computer. Had this choice said “insu!cient for either computer programs or cardiologists ALONE to make accurate diagnoses”, then we would have a better weakener, but still not one as good as C. E: So tempting, but we know from the stimulus that the cardiologist was “very experienced and highly skilled.” If this particular cardiologist was not representative of cardiologists in general, it sounds like most of them are worse, which would strengthen the argument. With Weakening and Strengthening questions, you have to decide which one weakens or strengthens the most. C tell us that the cardiologist has an advantage that the computer lacks, thus weakening the conclusion that interpreting EKG data “should be left” to a computer.


Logical Reasoning I • 21. E • 22. C


Logical Reasoning II • • • • • • •

5. C 6. C 8. E 9. D 10. A 11. A 12. C LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Logical Reasoning II • • • • • • •

13. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

A B C D A E A LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Logical Reasoning II • • • • • •

21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

C C D E B B


Logic Games: Game 1 F G H J K L

H! F or G D ~F + ~G ! ~H Car 1 ___ ___ ….. J! F or K ~K + ~F ! ~J Car 2 ___ ___ …… G <--> L


Game 1 Questions • • • • •

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

A E. A C D


Game 2 F H J N P T

H N

F J N T H P or P N

1 2 3 4 5 6 F/P


Game 2 Questions • • • • • •

6. A 7. C 8. A 9. C 10. B 11.



6. A 7. C 8. A 9. C 10. B 11. D


Game 3 Q R S T U

Q! Q T

1 ~S 2 3 ~S 4

~U!R2 ~R2!U R2!~U U!~R2 There must be an R2 or a U, and there cannot be both. LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com


12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

D D B A E B


Game 4 F H __ __ …. G H – F J L– GK K L M–J M

~L

1 2 3 4 5 6 7



18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

D C D B B A


Reading Comprehension: age 1 • • • • • •

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

D B B D E A


Reading Comprehension: age 2 • • • • • • •

7. C 8. A 9. E 10. C 11. B 12. E 13. B LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Reading Comprehension: age 3 • • • • • •

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

B A D D C B


Reading Comprehension: age 4 • • • • • • • •

20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

D E A E E B A B LSAT Course Workbook www.CaseBriefs.com

Casebriefs Lsat Course Workbook 3o7249

Overview 5o1f4z

More details 6z3438

Related Documents c2h70

Casebriefs Lsat Course Workbook 3o7249

Lsat Lsat Success 621f6d

Abundance Course Workbook 273p1m

Ultimate Gann Course - Workbook 583943

Cms Introductory Course Workbook 5f524j

Pmi A Course Workbook 314gl

More Documents from "Terrica Michelle Hubert" 23z1

Casebriefs Lsat Course Workbook 3o7249

6g3p1u

Albert Gyorfi - Skinny Love By Birdy (fingerstyle Guitar Arrangement) 3g613h

6g3p1u

Dragon Age Spells 3ap16

Tp Pertes De Charge Lineaire 1o5z3u