Category Archive: Sample Logical Reasoning Questions

/ / / / / / / /

Level Up Your LSAT Diagramming Skills With This Fun Quiz

Knowing how to diagram conditional claims is essential for every scored section of the LSAT. In LSAT Logical Reasoning, you have to diagram conditional claims very often with Must Be True, Must Be False, Could Be True, Sufficient, Necessary, Flaw, Parallel, and Parallel Flaw question types. In LSAT Logic Games, you’ll make some very nasty mistakes by incorrectly diagraming conditional rules. Finally, in LSAT Reading Comprehension, main points can be conditional, and many other question types will also depend on your ability to diagram.

All diagramable questions have very tempting sucker choices. This is because diagraming mistakes are easy to predict. So, an incorrect anticipation will probably show up in your answer choices. This makes diagramable questions pretty difficult.

/ / / /

No LSAT Practice is Complete Without Logical Reasoning

Last week, our LSAT practice quiz dealt with logic games. Stepping up to the plate for LSAT practice this week: Logical reasoning.

LR is the most consistent section from test to test and makes up 50 percent of your LSAT score. Thus, your LSAT practice should focus largely on mastering this section. The majority of the questions revolve around only a few concepts – arguments, validity and fallacies. If you can master these concepts during LSAT practice, proficiency with most question types will follow.

Below are a couple of original LR questions. Some do not have answer choices. This is to force you to anticipate – just another form of LSAT practice.

Batter up!


How Farnold’s Love Child Affects His Movie Career

In this week’s edition of MSS Logical Reasoning sample question, we examine the story of Farnold, a famous movie actor, who has come under fire for fathering an illegitimate child. Now, while he tries to get back in the movie business, certain head honchos think he might bring too much bad publicity to the studio. This one is what we call a “strengthen” question, and your job will be to figure out how to strengthen Farnold’s argument that he is a big enough box office draw to negate the negative press. Enjoy!

The Turmoil of Shaker Nation

In this week’s sample logical reasoning question, Riley examines the case of the Los Angeles Shakers, and the fundamental disagreements between the team’s owner, Dr. Bus, and the team’s star player, Kohby. Should they get the 7 foot giant from Orlando, or should they get the young point guard who can speed up the offense? One thing they certainly agree upon is that in the wake of that embarrassing loss in the playoffs, shakeups need to be made, and now it’s just a matter of figuring out what needs to happen. Check out the keynote explanation and text of the question after the jump.


The Tragic LSAT Tale of Lisa Logan

We at MSS bring to you our second installment of practice logical reasoning questions. Today, Misha analyzes the story of Lisa Logan, and what steps we need to take to validly conclude that her parents have failed in their parenting (odds are, it shouldn’t be too difficult to conclude that). If you have any questions after the video, head on over to the discussion board or voice your confusion in the comments. Check out the text of the question below.


An LSAT logical reasoning question, compliments of Charlie Sheen.

As anyone knows, Charlie Sheen would ace the LSAT, much like he’s aced living; he’s not just winning, he’s bi-winning. However, the women trapped in his sordid web need to know exactly how well they’re doing in the game of life (lower case to avoid infringement). The following logical reasoning question will test your diagramming abilities as well as provide them with an answer:

Any woman who lives with Charlie Sheen is a goddess. Charlie Sheen lives exclusively in the one-and-only Sober Valley Lodge. Brooke Mueller no longer lives with Charlie Sheen. If you are bi-winning, then you are Charlie Sheen, or you live with him.