LSAT Loophole Memorization

Premise Indicators

because, for, since, as, given that

What are premises?

Premises are the evidence

What are conclusions?

Conclusions are the claim

What do conclusions rely on?

They rely on the premises

Conclusion Indicators

Therefore, thus, accordingly, hence, consequently, it follows that, so

What does an intermediate conclusion do?

It fulfills the argumentative role of both the premise and the conclusion.

What is a hybrid argument?

A hybrid argument is a nested claim with a few premises attached

What is a nested claim?

When someone besides the author makes a claim

What is Conditional reasoning?

The art of if-then. If one thing happens then another thing must happen.

What is the sufficient condition?

the "if" part of a conditional

What are the sufficient indicators?

If, whenever, any(time), all, every(time), in order to, people who, each

What is the necessary conditional?

the "then" part of a conditional

What are the necessary indicators?

then, must, necessary, required, only (if), depends, needs (to), have to, essential, precondition

What does the sufficient assumption do?

It proves the conclusion 100% true

What does the necessary assumption do?

It is was has to be true, if the conclusion is true. It's the necessary foundation of the argument.

What are the three commandments of the Loophole?

1. The loophole shall not negate the premises.

2. The loophole shall not negate the conclusion.

3. The loophole is there. Thou shall figure it out.

What is the dangling variable loophole?

What if those two things are not necessarily the same?

What are dangling variables?

New words that appear in the conclusion but not the premise.

ex: "electronics" and "inventions"

Most common error in logical reasoning.

What are secret value judgments.

They happen when the author gets judge in the conclusion, but they cannot judge something without defining what the judgment words imply in the premise.

What is the secret value judgment loophole?

What if that value judgment doesn't have that definition.

What is a secret downside?

Secret downsides happen when the author compares two things and says one is superior without giving you the full story.

What is the secret downside loophole?

What if the author's preferred option has a big downside?

What does a casual argument claim?

It claims that a cause and effect relationship exists.

What are the casual indicators?

Cause, responsible for, produced by, factor, leads to, product, effect

What are the three omitted options that pertain to every casual conclusion on the LSAT?

1. What if there's no relationship here at all?

2. What if the causation is backwards?

3. What if a new factor caused one or both of these things?

What is bad conditional reasoning (Classic Flaw) and the loophole?

Author reads the conditionals supplied in the premise incorrectly

Loophole: What if we actually have to follow the rules of conditional reasoning

What is bad casual reasoning (classic flaw) and the loophole?

Assuming correlated things are the same as causation.

Loophole: What if one of the omitted options is the case?

What is the whole-to-part & part-to-whole (classic flaw) and the loophole?

The author assumes that the parts equal the whole or the whole equals all the parts.

Ex: you cut a triangular piece of pie and assume the whole pie is triangular.

Loophole:What if the wholes don't necessarily equal the parts

What is overgeneralization (classic flaw) and the loophole?

The author takes something small and turns it into something big. It occurs when you have something specific in the premise and make big conclusion about it. Overgeneralization does not mention the whole, it is a part-to-parts flaw.

Loophole: What if we can't generalize from this one thing to a bunch of other things?

What are Survey problems (classic flaw) and their loopholes?

Assume all surveys on the LSAT are done with the greatest possible incompetence.

Common survey mistakes:

Biased Sample

Biased Questions

Other Contradictory Surveys

Survey Liars

Small Sample Size

Loophole: What if the sample is biased, the questions were biased, there are other contradictory surveys, people lie on surveys, or is the sample too small?

What are false starts (classic flaws) and the loophole for them?

A false start is when the author/researcher assumes two groups are the same in all respects except the ones called out as a part of the study.

Loophole: What if the two groups were different in a key respect?

What is possibility ≠ certainty (classic flaws) and the loophole for it?

It is when the author claims that because the other person has not proven their conclusion that it cannot be true or there is some evidence of a conclusion so it must be true.

Loopholes:

What if Lack of evidence ≠ evidence of lacking

What if Proof of evidence ≠ evidence of proof

What is implication (classic flaws) and the loophole?

Implication tells people what they believe. Just because there are facts does not mean someone believes those facts.

Loophole: What if the person in question is not aware of what their belief implies?

What is false dichotomy (classic flaws) and the loophole for it?

It is when the author pretends there is only 2 options when there could be more. It can go wrong in two ways.

Limiting a spectrum

• Authors pretend there are only 2 options when there are 3: up, down, or unchanged

Limiting options:

• Limiting options pretend there are only 2 options when there could be more

Loophole: What if there are more than just 2 options?

What is a straw man argument (classic flaws) and the loophole for it?

These arguments "respond" to an opponent by "mishearing what was said to them.

Straw man argument phrases: So what you meant is" or "so what you're really saying is

Loophole: What if what they said has nothing to do with the claim they're pretending to respond to?

What us ad hominem (classic flaws) and the loophole?

It's premises insult the proponent of a position, but then the conclusion challenges the truth of the position itself. Proponents don't affect the truth/falsity of their position.

Bad proponent ≠ Bad argument

Loophole: What if the person's character/motivation does not affect the truth?

What is circular reasoning (classic flaws) and the loophole for it?

Circular reasoning assumes the conclusion is true before doing the work of proving it so. The trick is to look for synonyms between the premises and conclusion.

Loophole: What if we can't use the conclusion as evidence for itself?

What is equivocation (classic flaws) and the loophole?

Equivocation happens when the author changes the meaning of a word throughout an argument.

Loophole: What if we shouldn't let words change meaning?

What are appeal fallacies (classic flaws) and their loopholes?

o Appeal Fallacies are about turning someone's opinion into a fact, often in 2 ways

Invalid appeal to authority

• When the author uses a non-expert opinion to support their conclusion

Invalid appeal to public opinion

• Invalid because people are unreliable

Loophole: What if this opinion doesn't equal evidence of a fact?

What is the irrelevant (classic flaws) and its loophole?

It is when the premises are entirely unrelated to the conclusion.

Only choose Irrelevant when you don't detect a more specific, compelling classic flaw in the stimulus.

Loophole: What if the premises and the conclusion have nothing to do with each other?

What is the percentages ≠ numbers (classic flaws) and the loophole for it?

Premises about numbers never lead to conclusions about percentages and vise versa. A rise in percentage doesn't necessarily imply a rising number because the argument fails to mention group size

Loophole: What if the group size did not stay the same?

What does the C stand for in CLIR and the stimulus for it?

C: Controversy and the stimulus is debate

What does the L stand for in CLIR and the stimulus for it?

L: Loophole and the stimulus is argument

What does the I stand for in CLIR and the stimulus for it?

I: Inference and the stimulus is a premise set

What does the R stand for in CLIR and the stimulus for it?

R: Resolution and its stimulus is a paradox

What are the 3 steps to the CLIR training regimen?

OCD

1. Outline: Bracket and label the stimulus' argument parts

2. Categorize: Is this stimulus a debate, argument, premise set, or paradox?

3. Design: Design the CLIR associated with the stimulus type

What LSAT questions are POWERFUL based on the characteristics of their correct answers?

SW SCCER

Strengthen, Weaken, Sufficient Assumption, Counter, Contradiction, Evaluate, Resolution

What LSAT questions are PROVABLE based on the characteristics of their correct answers?

Conclusion, Inference, Most Strongly Supported, Fill in, Controversy, Agreement, Necessary Assumption, Method, Argument Part, Classic Flaw, Loophole Flaw, Principle Conform, Parallel Reasoning, Parallel Flaw

What are the POWERFUl CLIR?

Loophole, Resolution

What are the PROVABLE CLIR?

Inference, Controversy

Weaken question stem keywords:

- which of the following, if true

- weaken

- most undermines the conclusion

- most vulnerable

- count as evidence against

- calls into question

Strengthen question stem keywords:

- which of the following, if true

- strengthen

- most helps to + justify/strengthen/support

Sufficient Assumption question stem keywords:

- which of the following if true/assumed

- enable the conclusion to be properly drawn/justify the conclusion

- the conclusion follows logically if

Counter question stem keywords:

- which one of the following, if true

- counter

- in response to

Contradiction question stem keywords:

- if the statements above are true

- cannot be true

- violate the principle

- could be true except

Evaluate Question Stem keywords:

- the answer to which of the following questions

- which of the following, if true

- evaluate + the argument/the conclusion

- most helpful to know/relevant to evaluating

Resolution question stem keywords:

- which one of the following, if true

- most helps to + explain/resolve/account for

discrepancy/paradox/conflict/surprising result

Conclusion Question Stem Keywords

- main point

- main conclusion

Inference Quest stem keywords

-if the statement above is true/from the statements above

-must be true/follows logically

-inference

-properly inferred/properly be concluded/properly drawn

Most Strongly Supported question stem keywords

- the statements above, if true/by the information above

- most strongly supported

- most strongly suggests

Fill In question stem keywords

- completes/concludes

- a blank at the end of the stimulus

Controversy question stem keywords

- point at issue

- point of disagreement

- disagree

- differing opinions

Agreement question stem keywords

- agree on

- point of agreement

- committed to agreeing

Necessary Assumption question stem keywords

-Any necessary condition indicator: necessary/depends/required/relies

-assumes/assumption

-the conclusion does not follow unless

Method question stem keywords

-Argument proceeds by

-argumentative technique

-method of reasoning

-strategy of argumentation

-responds by

-describes

purported meaning

something that is claimed to be true but probably isn't

implicit premise

an assumption

qualify/qualified

to limit a claim, qualified claims are limited to make them more provable

Argument part question stems

-role in the argument

-functions in the argument

-argument part

-the reference to/the statement that

-quoting a phrase from the stimulus

Classic flaw question stem keywords

-flaw/flawed

-most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that

-questionable technique employed

-the reasoning in the argument/the reasoning above

Loophole Flaw question stem keywords

- most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it + [Loophole Flaw Prefix]

Principle conform question stem keywords

- principle/propositions

- most closely conforms

- illustrate

- situation/example

Parallel reasoning question stem keywords

- parallel

- most similar

- pattern of reasoning

- analogy

parallel flaw question stem keywords

- parallel

- flawed/dubious

- pattern of reasoning

- analogy

Debate

two people speaking

Argument

Conclusion supported by premises

Premise Set

NO conclusion: Premises do not contradict one another

Paradox

No Conclusion: Premise contradict one another