Subscription pricing
One more LSAT question. Does anyone have advice for matching flaws or parallel reasoning or most similar to the argument type questions? Anything someone said that helped them click for you, or something that helps you get through them quicker? These are the ones I struggle with the most, particularly for pacing and speed.
5
8 comments
Claire,
Fast approach that I picked up from a tutor:
Start with conclusion (w/o reading the rest of the argument), very often the last sentence.
Evaluate the Logical Force of the conclusion to the Logical force of answer choices to quickly eliminate any that do not match.
Evaluate Form/Condition in Conclusion (If A increases, B increases), Eliminate answer choices that do not match the form.
Often one answer remaining.
If you have time then diagram. If not then these are tricks I use
Similar language in the premise and conclusion. If the conclusion says some, the parallel answer should have the word some or equivalent of some. I can cross off anything that says none, all, most
Nots. If the premise or conclusion has the phrase “not x” then the parallel answer must always have a negation of some sort
Common trap answers share the same topics. If the stimulus is about baking and there’s an answer choice about baking, it’s probably wrong
Facts vs values. If the stimulus says anything about beliefs or should/should not, the parallel answer will too
If you have the luxury of time, you can diagram. Otherwise, for Parallel flaw: Try to describe the flaw as abstractly as possible and match it to another answer choice (the 7Sage labels like Part v Whole or Fact/Knowledge flaws are good for this). And for Parallel Reasoning, start by matching conclusions.
Also be mindful that some of the trickier questions will shuffle around the premises/conclusions in each answer choice, so be prepared to un-shuffle them to verify answers (given enough time)
Diagramming! Create a broad outline of the argument ie if A then B, if B then C, therefore if A then C. Don't read each AC completely, read only as much as you need to prephrase what a matching argument would be. Then see if the choice matches and if it doesn't, move on. For example, if AC A says if all cats are mammals and all mammals are fluffy, stop reading there and figure out what must follow-refer back to your diagram if you get lost. If the next sentence doesn't explicitly say that all cats are fluffy, it's out, no matter what else comes next. You can also generally use this shallow dip strategy to eliminate some before you even have to map them out-maybe you have the traditional structure above but AC B says all cats are mammals or fluffy, it goes out since it has a conjunction instead of a simple condition. It feels slow at first but if you practice it enough you'll get quick enough to get through each AC super quick, especially when you end up eliminating 3 or even 4 without having to read and think through them all :)
Hi Claire! I also really struggle with those questions, often because I panic and struggle to digest the sentence, if that makes sense (kind of like zoning out, but caused by panic rather than boredom).
When this is happening, I start with something really simple. I identify the logical strength of the stimulus and responses. So for example, if the conclusion in the stimulus is "So, John will go to the basketball game" and one of the answer choices concludes "So, Bridget is likely to fail her test," I know I can eliminate that one because the logical strength of the conclusions don't match. This helps me really quickly eliminate options without having to understand their structure, just their strength.
This usually lets me eliminate one or two answer options. At this point, if I feel like I'm still getting bogged down in the structure of each argument, I go back to the stimulus and try to translate it into plain English (or a diagram, but diagramming is kind of hit-or-miss for me personally). Like "This argument proceeds by putting forth a rule (like, an if then statement), presenting evidence that doesn't align with that rule, and then rejecting the rule because the evidence doesn't match up."
If going plain-English doesn't help, just take a breath and reread the stimulus and answers carefully. I was really shooting myself in the foot on parallel reasoning questions by panicking. Once I stepped back and stopped panicking, I improved a lot.
Sorry if this all stuff you've heard before. Good luck on the November LSAT! I'm taking that one too lol.