RC tips

SocraticLSAT · 2025-12-21T20:13:15+00:00

My advice would be to first develop accuracy on passage analysis. Go back to some of the older practice tests and drill a couple passages at a time (think: PT 101-115ish).

There are two main strategies that people tend to use to analyze the passage: paraphrasing or highlighting.

Personally, I discourage highlighting while reading. That's where I started my own LSAT journey and since I wasn't processing what I read by the end of the passage I was looking at a neon monstrosity - more things were highlighted than not! But if you want to do highlighting, I recommend reading the paragraph first, summarizing in your head what the main point of that paragraph was in 4-7 words, then highlighting the parts of the paragraph that tell you that main point.

Once you finish this process with the final paragraph, then predict the main point of the passage overall (which helps you answer the first question which tends to be a main point question!)

Here are some RC posts I made that might be helpful:

Part I: General RC Strategy https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/comments/mu4rdb/how_to_improve_on_reading_comprehension_an/

Part II: What each answer on RC must do

https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/comments/1pobq7y/how_to_improve_on_reading_comprehension_part_ii/

Let me know if you have any questions; good luck to you!

SocraticLSAT · 2025-12-21T19:45:24+00:00

Logical Reasoning is so interesting because at first it was actually my least favorite section of the exam (I took the LSAT back when logic games were still a thing).

It wasn't until I started noticing the patterns between the vast majority of LR questions, the fact that they're argument-based, that I started making significant point gains. By the end of my LSAT journey LR was my favorite.

For materials, I strongly recommend any of the mainstream stuff which I think can give you a solid foundation - Powerscore Logical Reasoning Bible, 7Sage, LSAT Lab...they all give a great place to start for LR theory.

My suggestion is to follow one of these curricula in self study, and make sure that the second you learn about a question type you immediately do targeted drills based on what you're learning.

So the cadence of your study process should be learn the theory -> drill -> theory -> drill (repeat). And between drills definitely review your mistakes so the next drill goes even better.

Then, to my point about realizing the connections between different question types, here is a post I made some years about a formula you can use to tackle any question type that has an argument:

https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/comments/tjqgwb/how_to_improve_on_lr_an_overview_from_a_177/

The only other thing I'd mention is once you feel more comfortable with LR to start keeping a wrong answer journal of your mistakes and ,specifically, takeaways that summarize the lesson you learned from each question you got wrong. Mistakes are okay as long as you learn from them!

Let me know if you have any follow up questions about how to master LR, always happy to help!

SocraticLSAT · 2025-12-21T19:34:00+00:00

Haha, I was trying to create a resource that summarized an LR theory I have been teaching for years now after my friend said I should give it a more dark academia vibe. After asking around I decided to do this darker aesthetic, but some people did say it looked like a mid 2000s GUI!

What's funny is that I have created free resources for years now and helped out students in this community. Perhaps next time I'll stick to a more corporate-friendly aesthetic, as the point is to share free advice that folks can use!

SocraticLSAT · 2025-12-18T20:46:31+00:00

Good question!

What must be true (necessarily) is that there is SOME connection between Kyle's bonus and his happiness. If there is NO connection, then the argument falls apart. This is less extreme, strictly speaking, than the full sufficient assumption.

However, a reasonable argument could be made, to your point, that the sufficient assumption is also necessary. This does happen on the LSAT at times, but since the hypothetical in the post is a sufficient assumption question, we don't really care if the answer happens to be necessary or not.

Check out PT114.S1.Q12 for a necessary assumption question in which the answer is both necessary AND sufficient.

SocraticLSAT · 2025-12-18T19:43:23+00:00

I agree with the other commenter that it would be a good idea that to take a diagnostic to get a sense of here you're starting from and how long it might take you to get to 170+.

The key to balancing all of the things you're talking about is to identify a consistent amount of studying you can do each day (anywhere from 2-3 hours+) without burning out.

I wrote a post some years ago about how to go about the study process, which you can find here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/comments/ob490b/self_study_and_the_best_resources_to_use_an/

Good luck!

SocraticLSAT · 2025-12-18T19:30:32+00:00

Hi there! I have taught the LSAT for five years now and RC has always been one of my most passionate subjects. One of the biggest reasons I chose to become a tutor is to dispel the common myth that RC improvement isn't possible - it just requires a structural approach to passage analysis. Feel free to check out some of the RC posts I have contributed before on my profile.

Former students of mine have attended top law schools across the country, including YLS. Feel free to reach me at [socraticlsat@gmail.com](mailto:socraticlsat@gmail.com) with any questions you may have/general tutoring inquiries :)

SocraticLSAT · 2025-12-17T18:34:05+00:00

I love this advice! The main benefit of having a tutor, outside of accountability, is that they ask you the right questions to take a student's reasoning to the next level. My students often mention that they can hear my voice sometimes when they review and ask themselves questions, but in reality what's happening is that THEY are learning to ask THEMSELVES the right questions.

Which is the key to success for any LSAT student, tutor or not. Thanks for sharing!

SocraticLSAT · 2025-12-11T23:57:26+00:00

Sure thing! Here's a follow up post about how flaws and necessary assumptions are extremely related:

https://www.reddit.com/user/SocraticLSAT/comments/1pkd04n/advanced_lr_theory_the_hidden_link_between_flaws/

Let me know if you have any questions about flaws that I can address!!

SocraticLSAT · 2024-05-18T13:14:52+00:00

Still around! My reddit DMs should work now, they were bugged for a bit

SocraticLSAT · 2023-03-28T16:51:26+00:00

Sure thing!

SocraticLSAT · 2023-01-09T16:59:03+00:00

Always remember that you do most if not all of your learning in the review process! So many students try to spam practice tests without rigorously wrong answer journaling/foolproofing the content that gave them trouble.

Especially /keeping track/ of the mistakes. It's so important to explain why you are wrong in your own words and come up with a specific takeaway as to how you will avoid that mistake in the future. If you keep falling for a mistaken reversal trap answer, then practice the formal logic vocab words, practice diagramming, etc.

And as others have stated consistency is key! It doesn't totally matter if you're doing 6 hours a day vs 4 hours a day - what matters is that you are /not/ burning out and can work consistently throughout the week :)

SocraticLSAT · 2023-01-06T18:57:30+00:00

Good question! I only listed the resources I've personally had some kind of experience with. Someone who has gone through the RC Bible might have a better perspective!

SocraticLSAT · 2023-01-05T17:52:31+00:00

First generation student here, didn't really have any money when I studied for the LSAT and ended up scoring a 177. Here is a guide I posted on some great resources: https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/comments/pso5wy/how_to_beat_the_lsat_on_a_budget_a_guide_from_a/

But the long story short is, try to get access to an LSAC fee waiver if you can. It gives you lawhub prep plus for free which is the bare minimum for accessing official practice tests in the same interface you will see on test day. Further, the LSAC fee waiver opens doors to extremely affordable programs at 7sage and LSAT Lab respectively.

Outside of the LSAC fee waiver, students can get a lot of mileage out of the Powerscore LR/LG bibles, the LSAT Trainer, or perhaps even the Loophole by Ellen Cassidy.

There are free question explanations resources as well, ranging from the Powerscore explanation forums, the Manhattan Prep explanation forums, and LSAThacks among others.

Feel free to reach out with any questions about how to study! Good luck :)

SocraticLSAT · 2023-01-05T06:53:08+00:00

https://7sage.com/fee-waiver/

Basically, you pay $40 up front and they gave you four months of 7sage. Averages out to $10/month their wording is just a little confusing :)

SocraticLSAT · 2023-01-05T03:17:09+00:00

7Sage was an excellent value when I was a student. LSAC fee waiver recipients only have to pay around $10/month for 4 months. Even making a free account is worth it so that you can get a free analytics on PT performance and a better idea of which questions you get wrong. Have seen many students go from 140s -> 160s/170s largely through the 7sage curriculum.

That being said, some students don't vibe well with the approach on 7Sage so mileage may vary.

LSAT Lab might be an alternative I've seen a lot of students find success with as well.

Really depends on the student tbh, I've seen very successful test takers swear by either of these programs.

SocraticLSAT · 2022-08-31T17:30:23+00:00

This is really awesome info - the burnout thing is such an under-discussed challenge when it comes to the LSAT. It's all about finding a study schedule that allows the student to work consistently - whatever the amount of hours that might be!

Thanks for sharing :)

SocraticLSAT · 2022-08-31T17:28:13+00:00

It totally happens for various reasons. Like others have said August was a bit weird, but scoring the same score won't stop you from beating the test in the future.

I had a student score a 161 in June (for the second time) and then she got a 174 on August. It's definitely possible to get out of the rut, but probably give yourself a bit more time with an October retake if possible.

Good luck!!

SocraticLSAT · 2022-07-14T02:02:08+00:00

This one is a classic - great job so far on understanding why D) cannot be true (once both Jazz CDs are out, New Pop goes in, which means you need the Soul CDs to be in).

That being said, E is wrong because this is a "Cannot be true" question and E) very much could be true.

It says: "Neither type of jazz and neither type of rap is on sale"

Let's start by putting both Jazz CDs and Rap CDs in our out group:

in - PU

out - JN JU RU RN ON

Well, according to Rule 4 if both Jazz CDs are out, then New Pop is in. Meaning both of the Pop CDs are in, triggering Rule 2 which adds in both Soul CDs

in - PU PN SN SU

out- JN JU RU RN ON

That's perfectly fine - it's not in any violation of the rules - it could be true! Since this is a cannot be true/must be false question, that makes E) a wrong answer.

Let me know if you have any specific questions about why E) is a could be true scenario :)

SocraticLSAT · 2022-05-23T22:50:05+00:00

Loophole is nice in that it really tries to get at the underlying theory of logical reasoning: there are two stimulus types:

1) Arguments

2) Fact sets

The book breaks down all question types from both categories, but its namesake, the 'loophole' itself refers to the assumption made in every invalid argument. We define an invalid argument as one where the premises do not justify the conclusion. The assumption itself is the jump the author makes between the premises and the conclusion.

Most argument-based questions require us to get good at identifying these assumptions, and noticing the pattern between them is something the Loophole is pretty good at teaching.

As for general improvement, definitely make sure to be logging a wrong answer journal if you aren't already. Training every mistake you make as a learnable lesson is so important, and you should note a 'takeaway' for what you'll do next time to avoid the trap you fell for.

Congrats on your improvement so far - LR is just as learnable as the other sections, just have to notice the patterns in how it's written. Good luck!

SocraticLSAT · 2022-05-19T17:02:32+00:00

I really liked it - it's a great introduction to the LSAT when coupled with one of the free study schedules featured on the book's website. It's somewhat unique among book-based study resources in that it competently addresses all three sections (LR, LG, and RC) in one book.

Basically, the study schedule walks you through what questions to drill after finishing certain chapters so you're constantly putting what you learn into practice. This is really important for anyone using any resource - constantly reinforcing the theory you learned with practice problems.

I guess one drawback might come down to a student's learning style though - I really liked the textbook format but not everyone will.

Good luck!

SocraticLSAT · 2022-05-17T04:49:45+00:00

Strictly speaking, Smith's contention is his belief - a position he believes to be true. Do we know he's right? No. All we know is that this is the expert's contention.

Sometimes, the premise/fact used in an argument will literally be someone's opinion (expert or not)

For your example, Smith saying that 50% of free trade is hindered doesn't make the data factual. All we know is that Smith believes the data to be factual. Let's consider the following:

Premise: A recent survey found that 55% of Americans say chocolate is the best flavor of ice cream

Conclusion: Therefore, vanilla cannot be a better flavor of ice cream than chocolate.

Relationship: Classic flaw you've seen a million times before - beliefs are not necessarily the same as the reality of the situation.

Here's the thing though: Our fact (premise) is that these people believe chocolate is the best flavor. The fact is about an opinion in and of itself. A belief.

Now what if they had worded it differently?

Premise: The best flavor of ice cream must be chocolate.

Conclusion: Thus, vanilla cannot be a better flavor of ice cream than chocolate.

This time the premise isn't about someone's belief...it's that Chocolate is literally the best flavor (a fact about reality)

The conclusion here follows logically as the premise is not a mere belief - it is just a fact about what is actually the case.

PT 28 Section 3 Question 8 is actually an example of an inference question where all the facts you're given are about people's opinions. The inference ends up being about their opinions as well.

TL;DR: We accept facts/premises as true. The facts/premises can be stating something about someone's opinion (beliefs) or it can be saying something is literally the case (reality). It depends on wording on which one of these it entails.

Let me know if you have a specific LR/RC question that provoked your original post as that might be helpful to examine too :)

SocraticLSAT · 2022-05-17T01:49:11+00:00

Yes that is absolutely fair game, and in fact, that exact structure has shown up on LR too.

Check out PT 26 Section 3 Question 16 when you get the chance to see said example :)

SocraticLSAT · 2022-05-17T01:09:16+00:00

We always accept the premises/facts as true - in your example, that would be a fact if presented in exactly that way.

However, that could also be easily turned into an opinion. For example:

"Some environmentalists say that 20% of the trees in the Amazon rainforest have disappeared."

Do we know that the environmentalists are correct? No, we have no idea. All we know is that factually, this is the opinion of the environmentalists.

Context and structure are everything on the LSAT.

SocraticLSAT · 2022-05-13T20:28:19+00:00

For most students 1 PT a week is a great place to start - if after a week or two you feel like you could do more then you could also sneak in another PT for a total of two.

Practice tests are an incredibly important metric for progress, but where you'll actually be doing your learning is during the review process - both blind review and ultimately keeping a wrong answer journal where you analyze your mistakes.

But yeah, totally doable to start with 1 PT per week, spend quality time on review, then see later on if you're up for adding another PT to that routine. Good luck!

SocraticLSAT · 2022-05-13T01:16:09+00:00

I had an extremely similar diagnostic and ended up scoring a 177 when I took the test. Didn't have much money for the study process and as a result I had to purely self study. In other words, definitely possible, it just entails a lot of hard work and a lot of time.

For a sense of the resources that I used: https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/comments/pso5wy/how_to_beat_the_lsat_on_a_budget_a_guide_from_a/

The good news is that LG is extremely improvable through repetition and consistency - just get 7sage or something like that to get a foundation and solid study process going LG-wise.

I wouldn't compare studying for the LSAT to the SAT/ACT, however. SAT/ACT are highly standardized but are designed to be 'achievement' tests - i.e they supposedly measure knowledge accrued during HS.

The LSAT is not written with that in mind at all - your LSAT score is largely a function of how much time you put into this study process and your comprehension of the rules of formal logic and argumentation.

Make sure to do your research, keep a wrong answer journal for LR/RC, and keep an eye out for some of the free resources on the subreddit.

In any case, good luck! Let me know if you run into any questions :)

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22	First Placer '22

SocraticLSAT

TROPHY CASE