Ep. 188: Advanced Conditional Reasoning on the LSAT

None. Some. Most. All… When you smash these words together in conditional reasoning statements, things can get tricky, fast. The guys walk through advanced conditional reasoning and share how they approach some of the trickiest questions on the in the latest LSAT FUNdamental. Plus, Ben shares a personal goal he’s striving toward that reminds him of LSAT prep, the guys shred a personal statement, and we get some more behind-the-scenes info about another prep company’s recruiting efforts.

As always, if you like the show and you want to get more from the Thinking LSAT community, check out the links below. You can connect with other folks studying for the LSAT, and get more useful resources from Nathan and Ben.  

Thinking LSAT Facebook Group

Instagram (upcoming events)

LSAT Demon

Strategy Prep

Fox LSAT 

Personal Statement Review Package

Events

Come meet Nathan and Ben and learn about changes coming to the LSAT on a college campus near you! RSVP if you plan to make it to one of the following events.

April 19 –March LSAT scores will be released

April 23Nathan is talking changes coming to the LSAT at Seattle University

May 1 – This is the last day to register for the June LSAT!

3:38 – Demon Updates

Imagine a workshop, dear listeners, where day in and day out a small team of LSAT demons tinker and tinker and tinker away in lines of code, steadily improving your favorite online LSAT prep platform. Can you see it in your mind’s eye? If you can, no doubt you’ll see Ben and Nathan and a host of other folks writing question explanations and adding features to the LSAT Demon. This week, Ben reveals that a better interface for reviewing your sections is coming to mobile, so you can see the question, your answer, and explanations cleanly in one place. Stay tuned. Your LSAT Demon experience is about to get shaped up real nice.

5:07 – Ben’s Murph

While all y’all are sorting out whether Cathy sits ahead of Mark on Wednesday vs. Thursday, Ben’s also working towards a goal of his own. But it’s not a 180 on the LSAT. It’s a feat of physical endurance. Tune in to hear the workout Ben’s participating in just one week before the June LSAT.

9:19 – LSAT FUNdamentals – Advanced Conditional Reasoning

Conditionals are one thing, but what happens when you start linking conditional statements together? It can feel like things get gnarly fast. But the reality is that if you break down this type of logical reasoning to the sentence level, it’s not that complicated. Today’s FUNdamental is all about advanced conditional reasoning, and here are some takeaways:  

  • The guys define conditional vocabulary
    • None = Zero
    • Some = At least one
    • Most = More than half
    • Not all = everything except 100%
    • All = 100%
  • Visualize these conditions as actual round numbers—if “most” of the dogs in a kennel are black, visualize 10 dogs, and then note that at least 6 are black.
  • Some goes both ways: if some lawyers are assholes, then some assholes are lawyers.
  • Most reduces to some, but can’t go both ways. Most cats are gray could be true, but it does not follow that most gray things are cats. However, most cats are gray does mean that some gray things are cats. “All” also follows this pattern.
  • When conditional statements are linked, they take on additional properties—if you read carefully and use common sense, you’ll be able to understand these with ease.
  • Don’t diagram—that’s not the best way to solve these problems.

32:06 – Pearls vs. Turds

Today’s Ps vs. Ts comes courtesy of Grass Mudhorse (@seamancan – Twitter) who found some LSAT advice while cruising the Reddit LSAT forum. Said recommendation urges test preppers to improve their RC skills by reading faster than they’re capable of until their “brain catches up” and the speed reading becomes “more comfortable.” It almost goes without saying that the guys throw this one into the turd bin, but they do try to find some merit in words that otherwise sound like a prescription from doctors in A Clockwork Orange.

41:04 – Personal Statement Slice and Dice

Ari asks the guys for some help with the final section of his personal statement. But what ensues is a full-on Thinking LSAT style critique. Ari’s essay, while well written, isn’t well-suited for a law-school application. The guys offer constructive feedback for Ari, and provide some pro tips to anyone penning their personal statement.  

1:16:39 – A Kaplan Recruitment Email

Veronica took a Kaplan practice test and landed a 161. Not too shabby, right? Kaplan definitely didn’t think so. In fact, Kaplan reached out to offer Veronica a job as an elite-scoring Kaplan tutor. The guys read through Kaplan’s email and guffaw at its contents.

2 Comments


  1. Hi guys,

    I think you actually got Most + Most wrong.

    Most A are B.
    Most B are C.

    This does not prove that Some A are C. But around 24:00 you say that it does…

    Reply

    1. Oops! Most A are B and most B are C does NOT prove that some A are C. Our bad, thanks for pointing it out!

      Maybe this underscores the importance of thinking these issues through rather than trying to memorize lists. It’s pretty easy to see our mistake if you think of a concrete example: Most baristas (A) make coffee (B), and most people who make coffee (B) don’t make coffee for money (C); therefore some baristas don’t make coffee for money? That’s clearly wrong.

      Thanks for correcting us! Seems pretty clear that you’re getting it 🙂

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *