Submitted by majorgeneraldave on Mar 17 2014
Flaw Types on the LSAT and Reading Every Answer Choice in the Logical Reasoning Section
Today, we're going to have a twofer; yes, about flaw types and answering Flaw Questions, but also about how to deal with answer choices, generally (I KNOW. IT'S ALMOST LIKE WE'RE WORKING OUT OF A COMPLETE, COHERENT SYSTEM OR SOMETHING).
Again, we start with our Four-Fold Path™ (not really ™, but as you know, it's important for test prep people to ™ things, and I didn't want to miss out on the fun).
Submitted by majorgeneraldave on Aug 27 2013
The re-re-return of the causal flaw and your continued best LSAT prep.
Just when you thought you'd seen the last of the causal flaw in a Logical Reasoning section.
Submitted by majorgeneraldave on Aug 12 2013
Good god I love it when a plan comes together. It tastes just like awesome.
Only three posts ago—and literally FIVE questions ago on the test as administered—we saw an example of the causal flaw. Specifically, the assumption that the causal relationship wasn't actually operating in reverse. And now, just five questions later, WE'RE SEEING THAT SAME SHIT ALL OVER AGAIN.
You'd be quite forgiven at this juncture if you were to roll your eyes at the test writers, say "Really? Is this all you've got?" and drop the mic.
Submitted by majorgeneraldave on Aug 6 2013
Behold the awesome power of recognition (in which we circumvent the process of analysis by speedy categorization by type).
The causal flaw, as astute and keen-eyed visitors to this space well know, is the single-most-commonly committed error of reasoning on the test, by my count.
Here again, it rears its ugly head, and we will dispatch it with verve and a bit of dash.