If you have been studying for the LSAT, you know the importance of having a precise understanding of the language being used. In many instances, a single word can make or break an answer choice.
Here are some common terms that I found most individuals misinterpret. This is largely through no fault of their own because we tend to use these terms differently in everyday life. Make sure you do not fall prey to these misinterpretations on the LSAT.
"Or"
'Or' on the LSAT means 'at least one', meaning it is totally possible to have both. This is very important because in everyday life, people tend to use 'or' in the sense of 'one to the exclusion of the other'.
Suppose we had the following statement:
"I will read my favorite book OR eat a slice of pizza"
There are three possible outcomes on the LSAT:
I will read my favorite book and will NOT eat a slice of pizza
I will eat a slice of pizza and will NOT read my favorite book
I will read my favorite book AND eat a slice of pizza
"Often"
Many people interpret 'often' as a large number, which makes them think it means 'most' ('most' means greater than 50%, as discussed in my blog post about quantifiers).
However, keep in mind that the LSAT likes to err on the side of caution when interpreting terms. If the term is open to interpretation, it is weaker in language.
Take the following example:
"James OFTEN goes to the gym"
This does not necessarily mean James goes to the gym more than 50% of the days of the week, though it is possible. For example, some people might consider going to the gym once or twice per week as often. The very fact that some people may believe this means it could be weak, and that is enough to allow us to interpret the term in the same way as 'some' not 'most'. So, the example statement can be thought as "James SOMETIMES goes to the gym".
"Strengthen" vs "Justify"
On the LSAT, 'justify' means to prove, which means we need to make something 100% certain. On the other hand, to 'strengthen' or 'support' only means we need to make something more likely to be true. In some cases, even making it slightly more likely is acceptable.
So, a question stem that asks, "Which one of the following, if assumed, would justify the reasoning above?" is asking us to find the answer that would prove the conclusion. On the other hand, a question stem that asks, "Which one of the following most strongly supports the reasoning above?" is only asking us to strengthen the reasoning.
"Takes for granted", "Presumes"
These terms can show up both in question stems and answer choices. If you are taking something for granted, you are assuming it to be true. These terms deal with assumptions, but more specifically, the Necessary Assumption. So, if you see an answer choice that says, "presumes that...", whatever follows must be the necessary assumption in order for it to be correct.
"Not all", "Not always"
Suppose we had the following statement:
'Not all dogs bark'.
People will often interpret this to mean that all dogs do not bark. From a conditional standpoint, they diagram it as Dog-->/Bark. However, there is a distinction between the two claims.
To understand the claim, we need to consider what qualifies as 'not always'. Notice how even if there was a single dog that did not bark, it would still follow that not all of them do. Therefore, you do not need it to be impossible for dogs to bark in order for the statement to hold.
So, the correct interpretation of 'not all' is 'some are not'. We can interpret the initial statement to mean that 'some dogs do not bark'.
These are examples of some of the many terms covered in the Ultimate Logical Reasoning Toolkit. This packet is filled with information about terms and concepts you must know, common mistakes to avoid, and general advice regarding each of the LSAT LR question types.
Stay motivated!
Cho from Impetus LSAT
Comments