How can we help?

You can also find more resources in our Help Center.

47 terms

LSAT

STUDY
PLAY
anomaly
a rare exception
assess
to evaluate
confuse...with...
to fail to distinguish between...and...
counterproductive
refers to an action that achieves an effect that is opposite to the one intended
drawback
deduction
effect
result
inference
deduction
notwishstanding
despite
overwhelming
extremely large
paradox
an apparent condition
prerequisite
a necessary condition
principle
a general rule that can be applied to specific cases
presuppose
to assume
proposal
recommendation
rejoinder
rebuttal
some
at least one
subsidiary condition
an argument component that functions as both a conclusion and a premise
temporal
pertaining to time
unqualified approval
complete support
warrant
to justify
which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies? (2, 2s or 2n)
2n
the argument assumes that? (2, 2s or 2n)
2n
the conclusion drawn above is properly drawn if (2, 2s or 2n)
2s
which one the following, if true, most helps to justify the conclusion drawn above? (2, 2s or 2n)
2
circular reasoning
restating the premise rather than giving a reason for holding that premise

a---->f
__________
a------>F
part to whole
when someone tries to say that what is true of part of something must also be true of the whole thing together
ambiguous word
The argument unfairly exploits an ambiguity in a word by treating two different meanings of the words as if they were equivalent.
infer
to conclude
equivocate
To speak or act in a way that allows for more than one interpretation; to be deliberately vague or ambiguous
3 types of ad hominym flaws
1. attack motives
2. attack character
3.attack hypocrisy (i.e. doctor says no smoking, see doctor smoking, so you think its okay to smoke)
conclusions introduced by
therefore, thus, hence, consequently, so, it follows that, it can be concluded that
premises introduced by
because, since, for, after all, proven by the fact that...
assumption
unstated premise
most
majority
causal
have cause/effect relationship
IF formula
the part of the statement introduced by IF constitutes the sufficient condition. The other part of the statement constitutes the necessary condition

if the lake freezes, then the swans will migrate
freezes----> swans migrate

also works with WHERE instead of IF
Only If formula
part of the statement introduced by only if constitutes the necessary condition. The other part of the statement constitutes the sufficient condition.

you can access the network only if you have a valid password

access network-----> valid password
only when, only where work as well
all formula
the part of the statement introduced by all constitutes the sufficient condition. The other part of the statement constitutes as the necessary condition.

All vertebrates have backbones

vertebrates -----> backbones
no formula
part of the statement introduced by no constitutes the sufficient condition. the negation of the other part of the statement constitutes the necessary condition. always applies to statements that begin with no.

no reptiles are warm blooded.

reptiles----->warm blooded(negated)
unless formula
part of the statement introduced by unless constitues the necessary condition. The negation of the other part of the statement constitutes the sufficient condition

The boat will sink unless we repair the hull..

Boat will sink (negated) -------> repair hull
not both formula and either or formula
julian cannot be in both london and paris at the same time.

choose one and negate it, or negate both.

either or, one has to be negated both cannot be negated
some
one or more, the opposite of all, at least one
most
more than half
2 rules for quantifiers
1. always need 1 all statement
2. need to have same thing occurring on the sufficient side of the equation
all statement must come before some or most

a----b
a some c
____________
b some c

=

aaa
bbbb
cc

one exception to all rule is when you have 2 most rules to conclude a some relationship
fruitful
better
if argument
1. identify conclusion
2. look for premises
3. good or bad argument?
skeptical
disagree with