Given that 50 percent of the LSAT is filled with logical reasoning questions, it is critical that you understand how to best approach these questions and reach the correct answer.
Consider the sample LSAT question below, which was pulled from the June 2007 test and is available on the Law School Admission Council’s website. Then , read the analysis of each step you should take to understand and answer this question.
Hospital executive: At a recent conference on nonprofit management, several computer experts maintained that the most significant threat faced by large institutions such as universities and hospitals is unauthorized access to confidential data. In light of this testimony, we should make the protection of our clients’ confidentiality our highest priority.
The hospital executive’s argument is most vulnerable to which one of the following objections?
A. The argument confuses the causes of a problem with the appropriate solutions to that problem.
B. The argument relies on the testimony of experts whose expertise is not shown to be sufficiently broad to support their general claim.
C. The argument assumes that a correlation between two phenomena is evidence that one is the cause of the other.
D. The argument draws a general conclusion about a group based on data about an unrepresentative sample of that group.
E. The argument infers that a property belonging to large institutions belongs to all institutions.
Step 1: Identify the Question Type
To identify the question type, look at the actual question asked. This question asks about an argument — a conclusion supported by premises or ideas that are accepted as truth — and which objection the argument is most vulnerable to. The words “argument,” “objection” and “vulnerable” tell you what to look for in your answer.
You are looking for the reason this is a flawed argument or, said another way, the reason the argument’s main points do not make the conclusion true. Knowing what to look for then tells you that this is a flaw question and that the correct answer will clearly explain the reason the premises do not force the conclusion to be true.
[Learn to cultivate essential skills for each LSAT section type.]
Step 2: Identify the Premise or Premisess and Conclusion
Since you now know that this is an argument, to understand and evaluate it, you need to identify all premises and the conclusion. LSAT arguments will often use words that indicate the premise (such as, “because,” “since,” “for”) or the conclusion (e.g., “so,” “therefore,” “as a result).
In this argument, the phrase that helps you identify the conclusion is “In light of …” The argument’s conclusion is the last sentence — the computer experts’ testimonies.
Step 3: Identify the Flaws
Because you also know this is a flawed argument, your next step is to figure out how the argument is flawed or, more specifically, why the premises do not force the conclusion to be true.
In this argument, there are at least two problems. First, the entire argument rests on the computer experts’ testimonies.
For experts’ opinions to be the basis of an argument, you must be sure that the experts have the relevant expertise to rely on. In this instance, you only know that they are presumed computer experts — you do not have information about whether they specialize in data security or the hopsital industry.
Second, the argument concludes that the hospital should make “protecting our clients’ confidentiality our highest priority.” However, the question does not give a way to set the hospital’s priorities.
The question states that data security is the greatest threat a hospital or large institution faces. However, you could counterargue that although dealing with threats sounds important, something as fundamental as providing good medical care might be a higher priority for a hospital.
[Practice seven tips for LSAT success.]
Step 4: Find the Correct Answer Choice
For flaw questions, the correct answer must articulate a specific reason why the argument is flawed. Let’s evaluate each answer choice based on these criteria:
A. This answer makes no mention of the factors that caused the data security problem, so you can rule this answer out.
B. This answer sounds similar to the first problem identified above. This answer choice looks promising, but you should always look at the other answers to see whether another is better.
C. The argument does not strongly state correlation or causation, so you can rule this answer out.
D. Although the topic of this argument is data, data is not used to support the argument’s conclusion, so you can rule this answer out.
E. The argument does not make this assertion, so you can rule this answer out.
This analysis leaves you with B as the best answer. It is easy to see that B is the correct answer after recognizing that the computer experts are not necessarily experts in the area they are discussing.
But what if you had not noticed that? In that case, you could eliminate answers A, C, D and E because nothing in the argument corresponds to these criticisms.
[Learn the do’s and don’ts to keep you focused on LSAT test day.]
Keep in mind that you will have, on average, a little less than 90 seconds to answer each question in the logical reasoning sections, and it may seem impossible to complete such a thorough analysis in such a short time. The key to speeding up these analyses is practice.
Begin by walking through questions deliberately, step by step, and slowly build your familiarity with the analyses until they become second nature. As you continue to practice, you will also become more familiar with the formulas that are throughout the LSAT, and this will increase your speed.
More from U.S. News
Weave Specific Law School Details Into a Winning Personal Statement
3 Responses for Law School Optional Essays
Craft a Captivating Law School Personal Statement
Conquer Logical Reasoning on the LSAT With a Sample Question originally appeared on usnews.com
