Guide to Every LSAT Logical Reasoning Question Type

LSAT Logical Reasoning is divided into question types. If you know how to recognize and solve each question type, you gain a large advantage. This guide will show you how to recognize each question type and teach you how to do them. Bookmark this page and come back to it to make sure you know how to use the method described. It won’t be enough just to read the approach once, you’ll want to practice applying the methods until you can use them intuitively.

The question types are arranged roughly in order of frequency. Of the types below, the easiest to master are Must be True, Necessary Assumption, Principle, Sufficient Assumption, Parallel, Point at Issue. You should take extra care to master the methods for those question types. Good luck! Let me know if you have any questions in the comments.

Click to Jump to LR Question Type:

• Flawed Reasoning
• Weaken
• Strengthen
• Complete the Argument
• Must be True
• Most Strongly Supported
• Necessary Assumption
• Principle
• Principle Justify
• Principle Application
• Sufficient Assumption
• Parallel Reasoning
• Flawed Parallel Reasoning
• Role in Argument
• Identify The Conclusion
• Method of Reasoning
• Point at Issue
• Paradox
• Misinterpretation
• Argument Evaluation
• Must be False
• Agreement

LSAT LR Flawed Reasoning Questions

Flaw questions are the most common type of LR question and one of the hardest. You can expect to find 7-9 questions per test will be flaw questions between the two scored sections. The hardest thing about flaw questions is that they are very abstract. You can understand exactly what the problem with the argument is, and yet have no idea how to find it in the answers. For example, suppose you figure out that a flaw has something to do with cause and effect. Then you see this:

• “The argument concludes a causal relationship from evidence which only supports the establishment of a correlational relationship.”
• “It improperly infers from the fact of a causal relationship to a claim that a reduction of the cause will eliminate the effect.”

#$@&%*!!

There’s no shortcut. You have to learn to figure out what sentences like that mean. I’ll be writing a guide on how to do so. But the most important thing is reviewing every answer which confuses you until you figure out what it means, in plain English. This will train your skill at translating flaws.

There are a few types of flaws you should know offhand: circular reasoning, cause and effect, mixing up sufficient and necessary, mixing up words, ad hominemn, part to whole, whole to part

There are dozens of other flaws, but it is best to learn them as you seem them rather than try to memorize in advance. The examples above excepted.

• Questions per section: 4-5
• Main difficulty: understanding what the answers mean
• Best Solution: Matching answers back to stimulus. Reviewing confusing answers in detail to understand what they mean.
• Common Trap answer type: Has the same concept as the flaw but is worded wrong. For example: “The student reading this contrives to overcome the bar exam with a goal of exceeding their heretofore extant performance on the law school admission test” ➞ I said you’re studying for the bar to improve on the LSAT. It’s the other way around.
• Common question stems: “The argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds?”, “The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that it:”

LR Weaken Questions

These are very similar to Strengthen questions. The key to these questions is spotting the flaw. Too many students rush on to the answers without figuring out what the argument is saying and why it is mistaken. If you clearly identify the flaw you’ve done 75% of the work on this question type.

Identify the conclusion and the reasoning. You should have a sense of what the author is trying to say. If you don’t, ask “how can this be right?”. You need to give the author a fair shot. Then, once you know what they are aiming at, ask “how could this be wrong?”. That’s the flaw. Look for that in the answers.

Intuition can be valuable. If your gut tells you something when reading an argument, pay attention. You may have spotted the flaw. Too many people block out their intuition. This is good advice for someone in the 140s aiming for 150+. But if you’re aiming for 170+ you need to learn to use your common sense, but in a rigorous way. If EVERYONE would agree something is reasonable, then that’s something you can assume and use.

Watch out for flexible answers. An answer has to weaken even if you give it a weak interpretation. For example, let’s say I’m arguing that my house will stay dry in the flood, because it has stayed dry in all past floods. Consider these two answers:

Some materials used in recent repairs are weak
The flood will be 3x larger than any which has hit the area before.

They both sound bad. But 3x stronger is 3x stronger. There’s no wiggle room in the second answer. Whereas “some building materials are weak” could mean that a single nail used on a single window repair is not strong, and everything is extremely strong. You have to take an answer at its least useful and see if it still weakens.

Strong answers are great on weaken questions. Never eliminate an answer because it is “too strong”. That’s like calling an answer too obvious(ly correct).

• Questions per section:  2-3
• Main difficulty: Finding the flaw
• Best Solution:  Don’t rush to the answers without finding the flaw
• Common Trap answer type: Answers which sound good but can be interpreted weakly. Answers with the word “some”.
• Common question stems: “Which of the following, if true, most weakens the author’s reasoning?” “Which of the following, if true, most undermines the author’s reasoning?”

LR Strengthen Questions

Strengthen questions are extremely similar to weaken questions. The core technique for a Strengthen question is not to rush, to identify the conclusion and reasoning and work out what the author is trying to say. Then figure out what’s wrong with it. Your job is to pick an answer that helps fix this problem.

The stronger and less flexible the answer, the better, as long as it is on point. For example, if I want to argue you will get a good LSAT score, if I say “You will get more hard questions right” that sounds good but it could be one more, which is not much. A better answer is “You will substantially increase the number of questions you get right”. You want the answer to be hard to weasel out of.

The biggest mistake people make on Strengthen questions is rushing ahead without having found the flaw. If you know what you’re trying to fix, the question will be much easier.

Note: A strengthen question stem may say “most strongly supported”. You can tell it is a strengthen question because the question will say “the CONCLUSION is most strongly supported if”. Whereas Most Strongly Supported questions involve using the stimulus to support the answer.

• Questions per section  2-3
• Main difficulty:  Figuring out the flaw
• Best Solution:  Take the time to identify conclusion, reasoning, the author’s goal, and where they have a flaw.
• Common Trap answer type: Answers which can be interpreted weakly, answers with the word “some”.
• Common question stems: “Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the author’s reasoning?” “Which of the following, if true, most supports the author’s reasoning?”

LR Complete the Argument Questions

These questions ask you to fill in the blanks at the end of the argument. Usually you’re asked to fill in the conclusion. So the key to these questions is understanding where the author is going with their logic. The best way to practice this type of question is actually to practice other types: identify the conclusion questions, role in argument questions, and in general drilling identifying conclusion + reasoning. Complete the argument questions will be easy if you can identify conclusions 100% of the time on other questions.

You can also practice these questions by covering the answers and forcing yourself to write down a prediction. Do this as a untimed exercise, then check how you did. Note that your prediction should be based on what was mentioned. If two statements are given, the conclusion should generally relate to both.

• Questions per section:  ~1
• Main difficulty:  Following the author’s logic
• Best Solution:  Untimed work where you practice correctly predicting the conclusion
• Common Trap answer type: Something that makes sense, but isn’t based on what was actually said in the stimulus. Or an answer which has the right terms but reverses them.
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following most logically completes the argument?”

LR Must be True Questions

Must be True (MBT) questions are non argument questions. They generally won’t have a conclusion and instead will just be a series of statements. The answer will be something that is 100% true if the stimulus is true.

This is a high standard. In real life almost nothing is 100% true. For example, you’re reading this and preparing to go to law school. But is it a Must be True that you will become a lawyer? No. You might become a judge, or a law professor, or graduate and do something else, or decide not to go to law school. Your being a lawyer is merely strongly supported.

100% true usually means we have conditional logic. So MBT questions are one of the small number of LR questions where conditional diagramming is useful. If a MBT question has a lot of statements with if, only, all, every etc and other conditional indicators, then you should probably draw it. Perhaps 50% of MBT questions do this. On the other questions the stimulus may instead make comparisons where one thing is larger/smaller than another or present another situation where you can say 100% something is true even though there are no conditional statements.

When you have trouble with a MBT question and it could be drawn, save that question in a list and periodically redo them until you can draw them with zero difficulty. This will make diagramming an intuitive tool you can use to solve these questions where appropriate.

Note: If the answer logically follows from the stimulus, it is a must be true question. If the conclusion logically follows from the answer, the question is instead a sufficient assumption question.

• Questions per section:  ~1
• Main difficulty:  Thinking precisely. Summing up the facts.
• Best Solution:  Drawing the questions where appropriate. Where not appropriate, summarize the facts and see how they combine.
• Common Trap answer type: An answer which reverses what we could conclude or otherwise uses the right terms in the wrong way.
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?” “Which one of the following statements follows logically from the information above?”

LR Most Strongly Supported Questions

These are often lumped together with Must be True questions. While the two types have some points in common, they are quite different. First, the common points: both question types are generally fact based questions and are not arguments. You assume all the info is true, and then the answer is something you can support from the info.

The difference is the standard of truth. Must be True answers are 100% true. Whereas Most Strongly Supported (MSS) answers are ~80% true. So you may be able to find an exception to the right answer – that does NOT make it wrong. MSS questions are more of a real life standard of proof. For example, it is strongly supported that there will be a presidential election in 2040. However, something could go wrong and there will be no election. So it is not 100% supported that there will be an election for sure. But it would also be very surprising if there is no election.

On MSS questions the key is summing up the facts and condensing them. Put them into your own words and simplify them. This will let your brain more easily see how the facts combine. You can practice covering the answers, listing the facts, summing them up, and forcing yourself to write down a prediction for what you can conclude from them.

Note that you generally shouldn’t diagram MSS questions. Because they are only ~80% supported, they don’t tend to chain conditional statements together. Conditional logic leads to 100% true deductions.

• Questions per section:  2-3
• Main difficulty:  Keeping track of all the info and forming a conclusion
• Best Solution:  Simplify the facts so you can more easily spot how they connect
• Common Trap answer type: Using familiar words in a way which doesn’t match what the stimulus said. This question type doesn’t really have a very definite trap answer pattern.
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?” “Which one of the following can most reasonably be concluded on the basis of the information above?”

LR Necessary Assumption Questions

Necessary assumption questions have a gap between conclusion and reasoning. Generally the author will shift terms in a way that may feel reasonable, but isn’t. The assumption is that the two terms are related – an assumption is anything we think is true but isn’t directly stated.

For example, suppose I say “You exercise regularly, so you’re sure to be in good health.” This seems like a reasonable argument, but it didn’t actually tell us anything about how exercise relates to good health. We have to assume it. So the right answer might be something like “Exercise is beneficial for health”. If this isn’t true, if exercise isn’t beneficial for health, then we have no argument.

The most important thing you can do on necessary assumption questions is spot this switch between terms. Generally it will be between conclusion and reasoning. Look carefully for a word or concept shift. Generally, the right answer will link together both of the concepts in question.

You may have heard of the negation technique. This is useful for assessing necessary assumption answers, but it is a second line technique. The most important thing is catching where the argument has swapped terms and looking for the answer which links both terms. Nonetheless it is useful to know how to negate. Your ultimate goal should be to simply read a statement and know both what it means and what its negation is. You can read more about negations here.

Note that strong answers are generally bad on necessary assumption questions. Context is everything, but switching from, say: “You have all of your phone battery” to “you have 99% phone battery” rarely matters. But saying “You have some phone battery” is a big difference from “You have no phone battery”. In generally a necessary assumption allows the conclusion to be true but isn’t that strong. However, don’t eliminate an answer only because it is strong – the concepts in the answer matter more than the strength.

• Questions per section:  2-3
• Main difficulty:  Spotting the gap between conclusion and reasoning
• Best Solution:  Practicing spotting the gap. Cover answers, don’t move on till you find where the argument swapped terms. Then look for this answer.
• Common Trap answer type: Something which uses one but not both of the key terms the argument swaps. Or, an answer which says “all” or otherwise is very strong. These negate to 99% and usually that makes no difference to a situation.
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?” “The argument relies on assuming which one of the following?”
• Commonly confused question: Sufficient assumption. These questions will say “The conclusion logically follows if” or in some way the right answer will make the conclusion 100% true. For law school applications, getting a 180 is more or less sufficient. Whereas applying is necessary. You don’t get much just by applying, but you get nothing at all if you don’t apply.

LR Principle Questions

LSAT Principle questions are one of the most varied LR question types. In general they involve applying or using some kind of moral statement, i.e. “We should go to the mall” as opposed to “We did go to the mall”. A moral statement is separate from a factual statement. No amount of facts can support a moral statement on their own. For example if I say:

• This person has no food. They will be hungry without food.
• We have more food than we need.
• We can easily give this person food without harming ourselves, and then this person will not be hungry.

Most people would say “Oh, we should give this person some food”. Why? Because we all have some sort of implicit moral reasoning we take for granted, such as “Don’t let someone go hungry if you can avoid it”. That’s part of being human.

Technically speaking though it isn’t good logic. We should make our premises explicit, so that everyone can agree. Once you add the moral statement above, it becomes obvious that we should give the person some food.

This is a simple example few would disagree with. But not everyone shares every moral principle – some of the worst disagreements in human society happens when people disagree on moral statements. Without making these explicit, people may not even know why they are disagreeing.

LSAT Principle questions require you to think explicitly about moral principles, about what we should do. They come in a few different types. The two main ones covered below are:

• Principle Justify
• Principle Application

LR Principle – Justify Questions

Principle Justify questions generally give you an argument with a moral conclusion, and fact based reasoning. For example:

There are hungry people here. We have extra food.
So we should feed the hungry people.

Now, to most people this will feel like the right thing to do. That’s because you have an implicit moral principle, such as “If I can help people, I should” or “If there are hungry people, we should feed them”. The second principle may feel so close to what’s already stated that it sounds like I’m just repeating myself.

But it’s a different statement. The reasoning above is purely factual, and the conclusion is purely moral (in the sense of what we ought to do or should do). This sentence takes a fact “If there are hungry people” and bridges it to a moral claim “we should feed them”. So IF you have hungry people, then feed them. This sentence proves the conclusion when you combine it with the reasoning above. So if a principle justify answer seems like it is repeating the stimulus, that might be a sign it is the right answer.

The most important thing on principle justify questions is to focus on what you’re trying to prove. So here, you would want to evaluate every answer from the perspective of “does this tell us to feed the hungry?” That’s what the argument is telling us to do, so you have to strictly evaluate each answer from that perspective. Often only 1-2 answers will justify feeding the hungry.

• Questions per section:  1-2
• Main difficulty:  Noticing where the argument has switched from facts to a moral conclusion.
• Best Solution:  Focusing entirely on what we’re trying to prove and looking for answers that support that.
• Common Trap answer type: An answer which reverses the key terms from the stimulus. E.g. “You should feed the hungry only if you have food”. Or, an answer which sounds relevant but doesn’t actually mention the principle we’re trying to prove. e.g. “Hunger is caused by people refusing to share their food”.
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following is a principle that, if valid, most helps to justify the argument’s reasoning?”

LR Principle – Application Questions

Principle Application is a great question type to practice. There aren’t many of them, but:

These questions are generally hard before you start studying, but
They can become unusually easy with the right method

So it is worth your while to perfect them. Keep a list of any principle application questions you get wrong, and redo them until you know them like the back of your hand. This will help you with new questions of this type. There’s not enough space here to give you a full guide to how to do these questions, but the key is focussing on what you can prove. Consider this statement:

If you help others you are morally good: Help ➞ morally good

Morally good is the necessary condition. We can prove that. But we can’t prove “not morally good”. If you take the contrapositive of the statement above, you get “not morally good ➞ not help”. There, “not morally good” is the sufficient condition. You can never prove a sufficient condition.

The answers will provide 5 situations and ask which one matches the principle. More than likely 2-3 of the answers will conclude “not morally good”. Since this is something we can never prove, you can immediately eliminate those answers on this basis. This is not an uncertain trick but actually a 100% certain elimination method as long as you’ve understood the principle and correctly identified the conclusion.

Once you are down to 2-3 answer it is much easier to see which one matches the principle.

• Questions per section:  0.5
• Main difficulty:  Sorting out similar sounding answers.
• Best Solution:  Draw the principle and get 100% clear on what you can and can’t conclude from it.
• Common Trap answer type: An answer which concludes something the principle can’t prove.
• Common question stems: “The principle cited most helps to justify the reasoning in which one of the following?” “Which one of the following principles, if valid, most justifies the above application?”

LR Sufficient Assumption Questions

On sufficient assumption questions you have to proof the conclusion 100% true. These are technically flawed argument questions, but they are different in that your goal is to help prove the argument correct. They are also one of the small number of logical reasoning question types where diagramming is useful. This is because conditional diagramming proves things 100% true. So, often sufficient assumption questions will include a chain of conditional statements, with a gap in the reasoning. The right answer will fill that gap. For example, take this argument:

“Baseball is the best sport, because baseball requires strategy, and anything which requires strategy is entertaining.”

This is not a good argument. Even when we fix it, it won’t really be a sensible argument. But your goal is not to evaluate whether it is really true. Your goal is to figure out what it is trying to say, and make it 100% true. Let’s split the conclusion, then fill in the evidence.

Baseball ➞ best sport
Baseball best sport
Baseball ➞ strategy ➞ entertaining best sport

You can see there is a gap between entertaining and best sport. So we get two possible right answers:

entertaining ➞ best sport
not best sport ➞ not entertaining

Not every sufficient assumption question uses this method, but a surprising number of them do. Focus on what the conclusion is trying to say and proving that right.

• Questions per section:  1-2
• Main difficulty:  Diagramming
• Best Solution:  Focussing on the conclusion first and filling in evidence
• Common Trap answer type: A reversal or incorrect negation of the right answer
• Common question stems: “The conclusion drawn above follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?” “The conclusion of the argument can be properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?”

LR Parallel Reasoning Questions

Parallel Reasoning questions require you to:

1. Look for patterns in arguments
2. Condense those patterns
3. Quickly evaluate the answers to see which ones do NOT share the pattern
4. Evaluate the remaining 1-2 answers more intensely to make sure they match

About half of parallel questions will use conditional language. You should generally diagram these, then scan for matching elements. The other parallel questions require you to sum up the pattern in a few words and try to match it.

• Questions per section:  1
• Main difficulty:  Parallel questions are long
• Best Solution:  Conditional diagramming where appropriate. Practicing summing up arguments otherwise.
• Common Trap answer type: One with similar language, or a similar structure except for one element.
• Common question stems: “The pattern of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of the following arguments?”
  “Which one of the following arguments is most closely parallel in its reasoning to the argument above?”

LR Flawed Parallel Reasoning Questions

Flaw parallel questions are nearly identical to parallel questions. See the general method for those above. Flaw parallel questions have the same style: some involve diagramming, others involve summarizing a pattern and spotting it. The difference in diagramming is that you need to be familiar with flawed methods of diagramming: incorrect negation, incorrect reversal, trying to attach a quantity word to a necessary condition, etc.

• Questions per section:  1
• Main difficulty:  Flaw parallel questions are long
• Best Solution:  Sum up arguments by diagram or in plain English. Scan answers to spot most likely matches
• Common Trap answer type: One with similar language, or a similar structure except for one element.
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following arguments contains flawed reasoning that is most parallel to that in the argument above?” “The flawed pattern of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of the following?”

LR Role in Argument Questions

Role in Argument questions ask you to identify the role a sentence plays within an argument. This is an important question type to master as identifying conclusion/reasoning is a core skill on every LSAT argument. To get better at this question type, practice identifying indicator words for reasoning and for conclusions. Words such as thus, therefore, since, because, for, moreover, etc. You can also take two statements and try reversing their order to see which way makes sense. E.g. “Dogs are great, because they are cute” vs. “Dogs are cute, because they are great”. The first one makes more sense.

Role in Argument questions will sometimes use intermediate conclusions. This is a fancy word for a simple idea. An intermediate conclusion is something supported by a premise and which in turns supports another conclusion. E.g. You are studying for the LSAT, so you must be applying to law school, so you must want to be a lawyer. The middle part is an intermediate conclusion supported by the first part. An intermediate conclusion is both a conclusion and a premise.

• Questions per section:  1
• Main difficulty:  Understanding complicated words
• Best Solution:  Reviewed questions and answers part by part and looking words up in the dictionary
• Common Trap answer type: Answers which reference another part of the argument
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the argument by the claim that…” “The claim that [X]m plays which one of the following roles in the argument?

LR Identify The Conclusion Questions

Like Role in Argument questions, Identify the Conclusion is an extremely important question type to master. You should aim for 100% on these questions. Identifying what an argument is saying is the core skill on logical reasoning.

To get better at this question type, look for indicator words and ask yourself “why is the author telling me this?”. And practice identifying the conclusion on every LR argument.

• Questions per section:  1-2
• Main difficulty:  Identifying the conclusion
• Best Solution:  Practice identifying the conclusion intuitively on every argument
• Common Trap answer type: An intermediate conclusion
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion drawn in the argument?” “The conclusion drawn in the argument is that”

LR Method of Reasoning Questions

Method of Reasoning questions are the non-flawed version of Flawed Reasoning questions. Both question types have extremely abstract answers, and you must pick one which describes what is going on in the argument. The only difference is that this question type doesn’t involve flawed arguments. But you still must match each part of the answer to the argument to make sure the argument actually fits with the answer. To get better at this question type, practice understanding what abstract answers refer to.

• Questions per section:  0.5
• Main difficulty:  The answers are very abstract
• Best Solution:  Review Method questions untimed and work out what each answer means. Look up words in the dictionary.
• Common Trap answer type: An answer which sounds plausible but is completely wrong once you figure out the meaning.
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following is a method of reasoning used in the argument?”

LR Point at Issue Questions

Point at Issue questions involve a disagreement between two people. The right answer will be one where:

1. Both people have an opinion
2. One person says yes, the other says no

Just being 100% clear about this makes these questions much easier. If you haven’t got a “yes” and a “no”, then you haven’t got the right answer. The yes or the no can come from what is directly stated or what can’t be denied based on what was stated. For example, if you say “I want a good LSAT score to help with my applications” then you basically can’t deny that you are applying to law school. You didn’t directly say you were, but the LSAT isn’t useful for any other kind of application.

Watch out for Agreement questions. They’re exactly the same as Point at Issue except much rarer. The right answer will be one both sides agree on.

• Questions per section:  1
• Main difficulty:  Deducing which things the people in the question believe but haven’t directly said
• Best Solution:  Getting a clear “yes” or “no” from each person for the answer you pick
• Common Trap answer type: Answers which only one person has an opinion about
• Common question stems: “James and Yardley disagree with each other about which one of the following?”

LR Paradox Questions

Paradox questions ask you to figure out how to make a confusing situation make sense. These are also called Resolve, Reconcile and Explain questions as the stem sometimes asks that. The most important thing you can do is actually figure out what is confusing about the situation. This sounds like obvious advice but most people don’t follow it. If you figure out exactly why the situation is weird then you can also figure out how to explain it.

You can go a long way on the LSAT just doing the basics right. Don’t move on to the answers until you figure out what exactly about the situation needs explaining.

• Questions per section:  1-2
• Main difficulty:  Rushing into the answers before understanding what you’re looking for
• Best Solution:  Before going to the answers, figure out exactly why the situation is strange
• Common Trap answer type: Something which may be true but doesn’t explain the situation. Something that merely explains one part.
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy in the information above?” “Which one of the following, if true, does most to justify the doctors’ apparently paradoxical belief?”

LR Misinterpretation Questions

This is an extremely rare question type. It is a variety of flawed reasoning question. These involve two people. The first will make a reasonable argument. The second person will misunderstand something and make a dumb reply. You have to work backwards from what they said to figure out what they misunderstood in the original argument.

• Questions per section:  0.1
• Main difficulty:  The misinterpretation won’t be explicitly stated.
• Best Solution:  Working out what the first argument is saying, and then going backwards from the second argument to see how they twisted things.
• Common Trap answer type: Not common enough to say
• Common question stems: “Yagel’s remarks suggest that he is misinterpreting which one of the following words used by Mavis?”

LR Argument Evaluation Questions

This is a very rare question type which has a lot in common with Strengthen and Weaken questions. Use the same process as on these: find the conclusion, find the reasoning, identify the flaw. Then, pick an answer which addresses this flaw no matter how you interpret it. Answers with some or answers that can be interpreted very weakly are generally not going to be correct.

• Questions per section:  0.2
• Main difficulty:  Finding the flaw
• Best Solution:  Practicing Strengthen and Weaken questions
• Common Trap answer type: Answers which can be interpreted to be non-meaningful, e.g. answers with the word “some”
• Common question stems: “Which one of the following would be most useful to know in order to evaluate the argument?”

LR Must be False Questions

This is a very rare question type which is almost exactly like Must be True. To solve this question, figure out what has to be 100% true, then look for an answer which contradicts that. Generally these questions involve conditional logic or quantity words.

• Questions per section:  0.1
• Main difficulty:  Combining the statements
• Best Solution:  Practicing Conditional Diagramming
• Common Trap answer type: A reversal or negation of the right answer
• Common question stems: “If the statements above are true, which one of the following CANNOT be true??”

LR Agreement Questions

This is a very rare question type which is almost exactly like Point at Issue. Two sides will be arguing or at least speaking to each other. To solve this question, you must find an answer where both sides agree the answer is true. So you are looking for a clear yes from each person. The most important thing is first of all noticing that the question is asking for agreement and not disagreement. I have gotten these wrong before by picking a disagreement answer. Second, it is important figure out what each side may implicitly agree with based on their statements. As in, they didn’t explicitly say something but you can say 100% they would believe it. For example if I say “I’m about to eat dinner” I must have food.

• Questions per section:  0.1
• Main difficulty:  Choosing between answers at least one side disagrees with
• Best Solution:  Look for a clear yes from each side
• Common Trap answer type: Disagreement answers
• Common question stems: “Bob and Rob agree with each other about which one of the following?”