LogIcal reasoning for tHE LSAT for weaken, main conclUSION, strengtHEN…

Every LSAT logical reasoning question is built around an argument or a set of statements that look like an argument. Your first step is always to identify its core components: the conclusion and the premises.

Photo by Ann H on Pexels

Photo by DS stories on Pexels

In Logical Reasoning, arguments are built from statements. A conclusion is a statement that the author is trying to convince you of, while premises are statements offered as reasons or evidence to support that conclusion. Sometimes there are also intermediate conclusions, which are supported by other premises but then go on to support the main conclusion.

When tackling Weaken, Main Conclusion, Strengthen, and Flaw questions, you're essentially interacting with an argument's structure and its assumptions. The key to advanced practice is recognizing the similarities and differences in how these question types operate.

Strengthening an argument means finding information that makes the reasoning presented slightly more convincing. It's not about proving the conclusion, but about increasing its likelihood. Most LSAT arguments have unstated assumptions or potential weaknesses; a "strengthen" answer often addresses one of these.

Photo by Brett Sayles on Pexels

Weakening arguments on the LSAT is all about finding the answer choice that makes the conclusion less probable, given the premises. You're looking for something that introduces doubt into the author's line of reasoning.

Here's the general process: