How to Identify and Analyze LSAT Logical Reasoning Arguments

Identifying and effectively analyzing arguments is fundamental to LSAT Logical Reasoning success.

It may feel daunting now, but with a little practice, you’ll start to see it’s not too hard. In this article, we’ll share techniques for breaking down complex arguments, distinguishing between strong and weak claims, and recognizing key elements like assumptions and indicators. Mastering these skills will improve your critical thinking skills, build on your ability to evaluate arguments, and boost your overall performance on the Law School Admission Test.

How Do You Identify and Analyze Arguments in the LSAT Logical Reasoning Section?

To identify and analyze arguments in the LSAT Logical Reasoning section, start by reading the argument carefully, sentence by sentence. Focus on understanding each statement, and feel free to reread whenever you don’t feel like you understand what’s going on.

Once you’re done reading the passage, identify the conclusion of the argument and the evidence that supports it.

Valid arguments are rare on the LSAT, and rarer yet in real life. You should go into every argument expecting it to be flawed, and on the hunt for what makes the argument flawed.

Lots of LSAT arguments are flawed because they’re missing key information. That missing information is called an assumption.

For example, look for the missing information in this argument: All cats are nocturnal because all cats are gray.

The author is trying to prove that all cats are nocturnal, that’s their conclusion. The author supports that conclusion by saying all cats are gray. Do you see what’s missing?

The argument assumes that all cats are gray, but without that information, we have no way of verifying whether or not all cats are indeed nocturnal.

It’s important to note that you have to assume the truth of the LSAT’s premises, but conclusions are fair games for skepticism. For instance, it’s fine to object to the example argument by saying that not all cats are nocturnal, or even better, that the evidence provided doesn’t prove all cats are nocturnal. However, you can’t object to the premise that all cats are gray.

What Techniques Help in Breaking Down Complex Arguments in LSAT Logical Reasoning?

To break down complex arguments in the LSAT Logical Reasoning section, focus on building the following three key Logical Reasoning skills:

1. Read the Argument Carefully

Effective reading is more than just getting the gist. Take your time to understand each sentence in the argument.

For example, if you read, "If you go to the store, then you will cry," followed by "If you cry, then you will lose all your money," connect the ideas. You can conclude that "If you go to the store, then you will lose all your money." This careful reading helps you understand the argument better.

2. Look for Inferences

Inferences are facts that must be true, given the information provided. As you read, think about what the text really means, and connect related ideas. Be careful, though, to make valid inferences. You need to distinguish between what is definitely true and what might just be possible.

3. Break Down Arguments

Every argument has at least two elements: premises (the supporting facts) and a conclusion (what the premises are trying to prove). Your job is to identify these parts and see if the premises sufficiently support the conclusion.

For example, read the following argument: "If you win the lottery, you will get $750 million. Therefore, if you win the lottery, you will be happy."

Is that a valid argument? Not even close. It’s missing something big. Can you imagine a scenario in which someone wins a 750 million dollar lottery, but isn’t happy? If it’s possible, for the conclusion to be false, it’s not a good argument.

So why is it a bad argument? Well, the conclusion is all about being happy, the the premise only says you’ll get 750 million dollars if you win the lottery. Is 750 million dollars enough to guarantee happiness? From the information given, we don’t know. This argument assumes that winning 750 million dollars will make you happy.

Breaking down arguments is all about identifying the gap between what the premises prove, and what the author thinks they prove (their conclusion). It’s your job to say, “Not so fast!”

How Can You Distinguish Between Strong and Weak Arguments in LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions?

To tell the difference between strong and weak arguments in LSAT Logical Reasoning, focus on these key factors:

• Quality of evidence—Strong arguments provide solid evidence or premises that directly support the conclusion. Check if the evidence is relevant and convincing. Weak arguments often have weak or unrelated evidence.
• Assumptions—Valid arguments have no assumptions. Assumptions are unstated ideas that the argument relies on to be true. If an argument depends on an assumption, it’s weak.
• Logical connections—Examine how the premises connect to the conclusion. Strong arguments show a clear logical link between the two. If the connection is weak or unclear, the argument may not hold up.
• Counterexamples—Consider whether the argument can be challenged by examples that contradict its claims. You won’t be able to come up with counterexamples to a valid argument.

What Are the Key Elements to Look for When Analyzing Arguments on the LSAT?

When you're analyzing arguments on the LSAT, focus on the following key elements:

Argument Structure

An argument includes premises (evidence or facts) and a conclusion (the main claim). Identifying these parts is essential.

Premises

Look for indicators like "because," "since," or "for" to find premises. They provide support for the conclusion. For example:

• "The world is getting warmer because atmospheric CO₂ is increasing."

Not all premises contain a premise indicator, but many do

Conclusions

Pay attention to conclusion indicators such as "therefore," "thus," or "so." They often signal the conclusion, but you should analyze the argument to determine if it is the main conclusion or an intermediate one. The main conclusion is the primary point the author wants to prove.

Important note: sometimes, arguments may not use clear indicators. That's why you'll need to learn to identify premises and conclusions based on context and the overall message of the argument. Ask yourself what the author is trying to persuade you to believe.

Intermediate Conclusions

These are conclusions that support the main conclusion. They function as both premises and conclusions. For example:

• "Obama is smart (premise), so he will make good book recommendations (intermediate conclusion). Therefore, you should follow him on Instagram (main conclusion)."

The intermediate conclusion (Obama will make good book recommendations) is supported by a premise (Obama is smart), but it also supports the main conclusion.

Opinions and Concessions

Opinions may be introduced with phrases like "many scientists argue that." Concessions often use "although" or "even though." These can help you understand opposing views or qualifications to the argument.

How can Understanding Logical Reasoning Principles Help You Identify Valid and Invalid Arguments on the LSAT?

The LSAT repeats itself, a lot. Gaining the skills to recognize a logical flaw will help you see that same flaw more often.

Being aware of common fallacies, such as confusing necessary and sufficient, confusing correlation with causation, and the famous ad hominem, allows you to spot weak arguments.

Applying these principles allows you to effectively evaluate the strength of arguments, and improving your ability to evaluate arguments is sure to increase your LSAT score.