LSAT prep — the skills
Two-thirds of your LSAT score comes from Logical Reasoning — short arguments you take apart, question by question. The good news: the moves repeat. Learn argument anatomy once, and every question type becomes a variation on it. Work this page untimed. Accuracy first — speed comes later.
Argument anatomy
Most Logical Reasoning questions give you a short passage — a few sentences that form an argument — and ask you to do something with it. Before you can answer anything, you have to see the argument's skeleton:
"Riverside should build the new library downtown. Libraries draw steady foot traffic to the streets around them, and downtown businesses have been struggling for years. Therefore, a downtown library would help revitalize the area."
The claim the author is trying to convince you of — here, that a downtown library would help revitalize the area. Look for indicator words: therefore, thus, hence, so, consequently, it follows that. The conclusion is the boss of the argument; everything else works for it.
The evidence offered in support — here, that libraries draw foot traffic and downtown businesses are struggling. Look for indicator words: because, since, given that, for, as shown by. Premises are the raw materials; the conclusion is what gets built.
The unstated link the argument needs to hold — here, that the extra foot traffic will actually turn into customers who help struggling businesses. Assumptions are never written down; they're the gap between premises and conclusion. Most LSAT question types are just different ways of poking at the assumption.
Logical Reasoning
The question stem tells you which move to make. There are really only a handful of families — learn what each one is asking, and the section stops feeling random. (LSAC describes Logical Reasoning as testing your ability to analyze, critically evaluate, and complete arguments — source.)
Find the conclusion
Which choice restates the argument's conclusion — not a premise, not a side remark.
"Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?"
Tip: if a choice is something the argument uses as evidence, it's a premise — cross it out.
What must be true
Given that the passage is true, which answer has to be true? The right answer often feels weak or boring — it just follows.
"If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true?"
Tip: the correct answer never goes further than the passage allows. Strong words like "always" and "never" are usually wrong.
Help the argument
Which new fact would make the conclusion more believable? You're usually supporting the assumption.
"Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?"
Tip: find the assumption first, then pick the choice that props it up.
Hurt the argument
Which new fact would make the conclusion less believable? Attack the assumption — never a premise (premises are given as true).
"Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?"
Tip: the right answer breaks the link between evidence and conclusion, not the evidence itself.
What the argument needs
What must the author be taking for granted? Without it, the argument collapses.
"The argument depends on the assumption that…"
Tip: use the negation test — negate a candidate answer; if the argument falls apart, that's the necessary assumption.
What would guarantee it
What single added premise would make the conclusion airtight? This one is stronger than a necessary assumption — it's a logical guarantee.
"Which one of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion to be properly drawn?"
Tip: connect the dots: the right answer bridges the exact gap between the premises and the conclusion.
Name the error
What's wrong with the reasoning? You describe the mistake — you don't fix it.
"The reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that…"
Tip: common flaws repeat: confusing correlation with causation, attacking the person instead of the argument, assuming what needs proving.
How the argument works
Describe the argument's technique in the abstract — analogy, counterexample, ruling out alternatives. Ignore the topic; watch the structure.
"The argument proceeds by…"
Tip: paraphrase the move in your own words first ("it gives a counterexample"), then match it.
Find the same move
Which of these five arguments reasons the same way? Match the structure and the flaw if there is one.
"Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its pattern of reasoning?"
Tip: abstract each choice to letters (A causes B, so B means A) and compare shapes, not subjects.
Explain the surprise
Two facts seem to clash — which new fact explains how both can be true? Both original facts stay true.
"Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain the apparent discrepancy?"
Tip: the right answer reconciles; any choice that denies one of the facts is wrong by definition.
Reading Comprehension
RC passages are dense on purpose — law, science, art, social science — but you never need outside knowledge. The questions reward readers who map the passage's architecture instead of memorizing its contents:
After one careful read you should be able to say in one sentence what the passage is doing — "the author argues that X" or "the passage compares two theories of Y." Most questions become easy once the main point is clear, and several ask for it directly.
Passages are conversations: the author, critics, proponents, researchers. Label as you read: author thinks… critics say… the study found… More RC questions test "who believes what" than any single detail.
You don't need to retain the details — you need to know where they are. A quick mental map ("paragraph 2 gives the old theory, paragraph 3 gives the counterexample") lets you find anything in seconds when a question asks.
Is the author enthusiastic, skeptical, neutral, dismissive? Tone questions are free points for readers who notice evaluative language — unfortunately, remarkably, fails to consider — while reading.
Some RC sets give you two shorter passages on one topic. Read each for its own main point first, then ask: where do they agree, where do they disagree, and would the author of A accept the argument of B? The comparison questions write themselves from there.
How to practice
Speed without accuracy is just fast guessing. The practice order that works:
Work assumption questions until the pattern clicks, then move on. No clock. The goal is understanding, not finishing.
For each wrong answer, write down: what did I think the conclusion was, what was it actually, and what will I notice next time? The review is where the learning happens — the questions are just the raw material.
When you're consistently accurate untimed, start timing individual sections. Rushing early builds bad habits that take months to undo.
Full timed sections, then full tests, under test-like conditions. Stamina is real — four 35-minute sections demand it.
The schedule builder turns these skills into a week-by-week program: LR foundations, every question type, Reading Comprehension, timed practice, and review — sized to the weeks and hours you actually have.
LSAT is a registered trademark of the Law School Admission Council (LSAC). This guide is unofficial and is not affiliated with or endorsed by LSAC. For official descriptions of the test sections, see LSAC's Types of LSAT Questions.