Archive for 'LSAT Logical Reasoning'

LSAT Preparation: Thinking About LSAT Thinking

Posted by:

One way to further your LSAT preparation is to think about logical concepts within the context of everyday life. We posted a video called “Thinking About LSAT Thinking: the LSAT in Everyday Life,” which provides some useful tips along these lines.

Read more
0

Bad LSAT Arguments, Part 3: Correlation is Not Causation

Posted by:

Another common example of bad LSAT arguments is the fallacy of correlation vs. cause and effect.  This fallacy occurs when something is identified as the cause of an event, but it has not actually been shown to be the cause.  This fallacy is included in the many forms of LSAT arguments we cover in our LSAT preparation materials.  It is also a common area where students get tripped up.
(This is Part 3 of a series of blog posts on …

Read more
0

Bad LSAT Arguments Part 2: The Whole Is Not Always the Sum of its Parts

Posted by:

As our first example in this series of blog posts on bad LSAT arguments (be sure to read Part 1 and Part 3), we will be looking at the fallacy of composition. If an argument concludes that a property shared by a number of individual items is also shared by a collection of those items, it has committed the fallacy of composition.
Similarly, if an argument concludes that a property of the parts of an object must also be a …

Read more
0

Bad LSAT Arguments, Part 1: The Importance of Identifying Bad Logical Reasoning

Posted by:

Making a logically valid argument is a necessary skill for any attorney to have, but many LSAT arguments purposely contain incorrect methods of argumentation, which are otherwise known as logical fallacies. The logical fallacies contained in these LSAT arguments date back years, but they are as relevant today as ever.
(This is Part 1 of a series of 3 blog posts on bad LSAT arguments.  After reading this post, please read Part 2 and Part 3.)
Why is identifying bad …

Read more
0

LSAT Arguments: The Difference Between Everyday Reasoning and LSAT Logic

Posted by:

LSAT arguments are different in structure than arguments we are otherwise used to in everyday life.  Very different. Your success on the LSAT depends on your ability to recognize the structure of LSAT arguments, find flaws where necessary, and differentiate between valid LSAT arguments and invalid ones.
All valid LSAT arguments contain at least two premises and one conclusion
A conclusion is the statement that an argument is trying to convince us of. A premise is a statement intended to support …

Read more
0
SEO Powered By SEOPressor

# #