Mixed Deck — All LSAT Topics Flashcards

In a defined grouping game, the rule 'No more than 2 members of Group A can be selected' functions primarily as:

Answer: A maximum constraint on Group A

The phrase 'no more than 2' sets an upper limit (maximum) on the size of Group A.

When a comparative reading question asks which statement 'the authors of both passages would agree with,' you should look for a claim that:

Answer: Both authors are committed to based on their respective arguments

Agreement questions require inferring shared commitments from each author's argument, not hunting for identical wording—authors can agree implicitly through their shared premises.

A sufficient assumption differs from a necessary assumption in that a sufficient assumption:

Answer: Guarantees the conclusion when added to the premises

A sufficient assumption, when combined with the premises, is strong enough on its own to guarantee the conclusion.

A linguist argues that children who are raised bilingual develop stronger executive function skills than monolingual children. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens this argument? (A) Bilingual children often outperform monolingual children on tasks requiring attention switching and inhibition of competing responses. (B) Learning a second language requires significant time and effort that could be spent on other activities. (C) Some researchers have questioned whether the bilingual advantage in executive function is as large as initially reported. (D) Children raised in bilingual households tend to score slightly lower on vocabulary tests in each individual language.

Answer: Bilingual children often outperform monolingual children on tasks requiring attention switching and inhibition of competing responses.

Option A directly supports the claim by showing that bilingual children outperform on the specific cognitive tasks that constitute executive function.

Five toddlers attend Big Bean Playroom: Amara, Bea, Calix, Danny, and Evia. Five trains, each of a different color, are lined up. Blue, Green, Orange, Red, and Yellow are the colors from left to right. Each child has their own train to play with. Calix despises the colors orange and yellow. Evia and his older brother Danny are separated by only one train. Amanda is seated between two little guys. Danny immediately snatches the blue train and refuses to share it. Who is it that is playing with the yellow train?

Answer: Bea

Explanation: Danny is playing with the blue train. Evia is playing with either the green or the orange train. Calix is playing with the red train. Amara is in between two boys so she can't be playing with the yellow train on the far right. Bea is the only child who could be playing with the yellow train.

A game requires selecting 3 from {A, B, C, D, E}. The constraint is: 'Exactly one of B or C must be selected.' If B is not selected, which is true?

Answer: C must be selected

The 'exactly one' constraint means if B is out, C must be in to satisfy the requirement.

A professor schedules six office hours visits in sequence—students named J, K, L, M, N, O. K visits after L. O visits before K. N visits immediately before M. J visits last. Which of the following cannot be the second visit?

Answer: K

K must come after both L and O. With J last (position 6), K must come after at least two other people (L and O), placing K in position 3 at earliest. K cannot be second.

Six portraits are hung in a straight line on the wall by a photographer. Six members of the family are depicted in the portraits: Lei, May, Naomi, Oscar, Pat, and Sam. The hanging order of the portraits must adhere to the following guidelines: May's portrait must be the first or last on the list. There must be only one photograph of Naomi and Sam. After Lei's portrait, but before Sam's, Naomi's must be done. Which of the following is a suitable hanging order for the portraits?

Answer: May, Lei, Oscar, Naomi, Pat, Sam

Explanation: Any option without May being first or last is immediately taken out. Any option without one space between Naomi and Pat is taken out, and any option that has Pat appearing before Naomi is taken out. Any option that doesn't have Lei appearing before Naomi is taken out, leaving only the correct answer as an option.

A committee of 5 is selected from 10 members: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J. B and C cannot both be on the committee. D is on the committee only if E is on the committee. F and G must both be on the committee or neither is. H is not on the committee. I and J must be on the committee. Which of the following must be true?

Answer: F and G are on the committee.

I and J are on the committee (2 slots). H is not on the committee. 3 more slots from A,B,C,D,E,F,G. F and G must both be included or both excluded. If F and G are excluded, 3 slots come from {A,B,C,D,E}. If F and G are included, they fill 2 of the 3 remaining slots. There's no constraint forcing F and G to be included—they could both be excluded. So this doesn't necessarily hold. Actually, we need to check if F and G MUST be included.

Passage: The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects against unreasonable searches and seizures and generally requires law enforcement to obtain a warrant before conducting a search. However, courts have recognized numerous exceptions to the warrant requirement. The 'exigent circumstances' exception permits warrantless entry when officers reasonably believe immediate action is necessary to prevent physical harm, the destruction of evidence, or the escape of a suspect. The 'plain view' doctrine allows officers who are lawfully present in a location to seize evidence that is clearly visible without obtaining a warrant. The 'search incident to lawful arrest' exception permits officers to search the immediate area around an arrested person to prevent weapons retrieval or evidence destruction. Critics argue that these exceptions have eroded Fourth Amendment protections to the point where the warrant requirement is the exception rather than the rule. The primary purpose of the passage is to:

Answer: Describe the warrant requirement and several recognized exceptions to it.

The passage describes the warrant requirement and three specific exceptions, ending with critics' views. Its purpose is descriptive/explanatory rather than argumentative.

What is the primary skill tested by Reading Comprehension passages on the LSAT?

Answer: Understanding the structure, purpose, and main point of complex academic writing

LSAT Reading Comprehension tests whether you can extract meaning, structure, and author intent from challenging texts — not memorize facts or apply outside knowledge.

A judge argues that defendants represented by private attorneys receive fairer outcomes than those with public defenders because private attorney clients are acquitted more often. Which most weakens this argument?

Answer: Defendants who can afford private attorneys are also more likely to be charged with less serious crimes and have fewer prior convictions, which independently predict acquittal.

Defendant characteristics—not attorney type—may explain the acquittal gap, since wealthier defendants face different charges and histories.

A city that installed more streetlights in an area saw a reduction in nighttime crime but an increase in daytime crime in the same neighborhood. Which of the following most helps to explain the increase in daytime crime?

Answer: Criminals who had previously operated at night in that neighborhood shifted their activity to daytime in the same area after finding nighttime activity deterred by lighting.

Temporal displacement: nighttime deterrence pushed criminals to operate in daylight in the same location rather than stopping their criminal activity, increasing daytime crime.

Sociologist: 'Every member of the research team is an expert in their respective field—we have a leading statistician, a renowned ethnographer, and a developmental psychologist with decades of experience. Therefore, the research team as a whole is guaranteed to be an expert team.' The reasoning is flawed because it...

Answer: assumes that properties of the individual parts of a group necessarily apply to the group as a whole.

This argument commits a fallacy of composition, also known as a part-to-whole flaw. It assumes that because each individual member of the team has a positive quality (being an expert), the team as a collective unit will automatically possess that same quality. However, a team of experts can fail to function as an expert team due to poor communication, conflicting methodologies, or lack of leadership. The quality of the parts does not guarantee the quality of the whole.

A social science LSAT passage presents a study showing communities with higher 'social capital' — defined as trust and civic participation — have lower crime rates, but cautions that 'the causal direction remains unclear.' This caution suggests:

Answer: It is uncertain whether social capital reduces crime or whether lower crime enables social capital

When the 'causal direction is unclear,' the author means it is uncertain which variable causes the other — social capital may reduce crime, or low crime may foster social capital.

The 'principle' question type in Logical Reasoning typically asks you to:

Answer: Identify a general rule that justifies the argument or matches a specific situation

Principle questions ask you to match an abstract rule to a concrete situation or identify the rule that underlies the argument.

Choose the response that fully answers the following: Blue mountain lions are universal. Mountain lion spotted by Peter.

Answer: The mountain lion was blue.

The first premise, 'Blue mountain lions are universal,' is an unusual phrasing but in the context of a logical reasoning question, it is best interpreted as 'All mountain lions are blue.' The second premise states that 'Mountain lion spotted by Peter.' If all mountain lions are blue, and Peter spotted a mountain lion, then the specific mountain lion Peter spotted must necessarily be blue. This is a direct application of the general rule to a specific instance.

Principle: 'A contract clause is unenforceable if it was not disclosed to the signing party before the contract was executed.' A court must determine whether a penalty clause is enforceable. Which fact is MOST relevant to applying this principle?

Answer: The penalty clause appeared in a footnote added to the contract after the party signed.

If the clause was added after signing, it was not disclosed before execution, directly triggering the unenforceability condition in the stated principle.

A principle states: 'An action is morally permissible only if it respects the autonomy of all affected parties.' A judge applies this principle to rule that a company's nondisclosure agreement is impermissible. Which scenario best justifies this ruling?

Answer: The NDA prevents employees from discussing their own health conditions with doctors.

Preventing employees from discussing their own medical conditions with doctors undermines their personal autonomy, directly violating the stated principle.

Six musicians perform in sequence. Violinist (V) performs sometime before Cellist (C). Guitarist (G) performs immediately after Drummer (D). Pianist (P) performs last. Flutist (F) performs first. If C performs third, which of the following could be the complete performance order?

Answer: F, V, C, D, G, P

F first, V second, C third, D fourth, G fifth (G immediately after D), P last — all constraints satisfied.