Logical reasoning question types - Method of reasoning and a...

Learning Outcomes

After reading this article, you will be able to identify and analyze LSAT logical reasoning questions that focus on method of reasoning and argument strategies. You will learn to describe argument structures, recognize common reasoning patterns, differentiate between method and flaw questions, and apply efficient techniques for answering these LSAT question types.

LSAT Syllabus

For LSAT, you are required to understand the reasoning process behind arguments, not just their content. For method of reasoning and argument strategy questions, pay careful attention to:

• the logical progression and structure of an argument
• how to describe the steps taken from premises to conclusion
• recognizing and distinguishing between valid, flawed, and parallel patterns of reasoning
• analyzing argument strategy in multi-person dialogues (e.g., how one party responds to another)
• selecting the best answer when describing argument methods, abstracting away from specific subject matter
• using process of elimination to identify relevant and irrelevant answer choices

A strong understanding of these syllabus points is necessary for answering method and strategy questions quickly and accurately under exam conditions.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. What is the primary distinction between a method of reasoning question and a flaw question in LSAT logical reasoning?
2. Which feature is most typical in a correct answer to a method of reasoning question? a) It references the subject matter of the argument.
   b) It describes the logical steps of the argument in general terms.
   c) It challenges the evidence used in the argument.
   d) It proposes an alternative conclusion.
3. Which best describes a parallel reasoning question?
   a) Identify a similar topic in the answer choices.
   b) Match the logical structure of the original argument, regardless of context.
4. True or false? In a dialogue method question, the correct answer always evaluates both speakers.

Introduction

Logical reasoning questions on the LSAT not only test your ability to evaluate facts but also your understanding of how arguments are constructed. Method of reasoning and argument strategy questions examine your skill in describing how an argument proceeds, the steps taken, and the relationship between parts of the argument or between speakers. Success in this area requires you to abstract away from the details and focus on the logical moves and reasoning patterns involved.

Key Term: method of reasoning question
A question type that asks you to identify or describe how an argument proceeds from its premises to its conclusion, usually in abstract or general terms.

IDENTIFYING METHOD OF REASONING QUESTIONS

Method of reasoning questions explicitly ask what the author is doing or how the argument proceeds. These questions often use stems such as, "The argument proceeds by...", "Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played by X in the argument?", or "Y responds to X by...".

Unlike questions about validity or fact extraction, your task here is to focus on the logical structure and relationships, not on the facts presented.

Key Term: argument structure
The sequential pattern or logical steps that connect premises to the conclusion in an argument. Includes patterns like conditional, analogy, generalization, and cause-effect.

DESCRIBING ARGUMENT STRATEGY

When analyzing argument strategy or method questions, follow these steps:

1. Find the conclusion and premises. Determine what the argument is trying to prove and the evidence used.
2. Summarize the reasoning. In a brief phrase, state the logical steps the author took.
3. Ignore content; focus on logic. Correct answers describe reasoning processes, not specific facts or topics.
4. Eliminate incorrect matches. If any part of an answer choice does not correspond to the argument’s logic, eliminate it immediately.

Key Term: reasoning pattern
The repeatable logical pathway an argument follows—such as analogy, generalization, deduction, or conditional chain.

Worked Example 1.1

Argument: "Only certified electricians can install building wiring safely. Pat installed the wiring safely. Therefore, Pat must be a certified electrician."

What is the method of reasoning in this argument?

Answer:
The argument applies a general rule to a specific case and draws a conclusion by affirming the necessary condition. In abstract terms, it moves from a general rule ("only if") to a specific instance, then reaches a conclusion about that specific instance.

METHOD QUESTIONS INVOLVING DIALOGUES

Some method of reasoning questions present a conversation between two speakers. These questions commonly ask how one speaker responds to another, or what logical strategy is used in reply.

For such questions:

• Identify the reasoning step each person takes.
• Focus on relationships (e.g., counterargument, concession, analogy).
• Abstract from the content and match the answer that describes the logical response.

Key Term: argument strategy
The deliberate approach or logical technique used by an author or speaker in developing or evaluating an argument.

Worked Example 1.2

Speaker 1: "Class sizes should be reduced to improve student performance."
Speaker 2: "But research suggests that teacher quality has a stronger impact than class size."

What is Speaker 2's argument strategy in response?

Answer:
Speaker 2 introduces an alternative factor to challenge the sufficiency of Speaker 1's recommendation, thus undermining the original proposal by pointing to a different cause.

Exam Warning

For method questions, do not select answer choices that refer directly to the topic (e.g., "the argument is about schools") unless the question asks about content. Focus on abstract descriptions like "the argument provides an alternative explanation" or "the argument contrasts two approaches."

PARALLEL REASONING AND PARALLEL FLAW QUESTIONS

Parallel reasoning questions ask you to identify an argument in the answer choices that matches the logical structure of the original argument, regardless of subject. Parallel flaw questions require you to match not only the structure but also the type of logical error.

Key steps for parallel reasoning:

• Diagram the structure and note key logical moves (conditional, generalization, causal, etc.).
• Look for elements like conclusion type, quantifiers (all, some, most), and use of analogy or statistics.
• Disregard content. Only the structure matters.
• For parallel flaw, make sure the same error is found (e.g., "confuses sufficient for necessary condition").

Key Term: parallel reasoning question
An LSAT question type where you must select the answer with the same logical structure (and, in flaw questions, the same type of error) as the stimulus argument.

Worked Example 1.3

Original: "All dogs in the park must wear leashes. Rex is in the park, so he must wear a leash."

Which answer choice below exhibits the same pattern of reasoning?

A) All students must submit forms. Maria is a student, so she must submit a form.
B) If someone eats fruit, they are healthy. Tom is healthy, so he must eat fruit.

Answer:
Choice A matches the original argument’s pattern—applying a general rule to a specific case and drawing the required conclusion.

COMMON METHOD OF REASONING ANSWER FORMS

Correct answers for method of reasoning questions typically:

• Use abstract language (e.g., "applies a general rule to a case," "eliminates a possible explanation," "draws an analogy").
• Refer to reasoning moves, not content (e.g., "presents an alternative explanation," "rejects a proposal by emphasizing practical difficulties," "offers a counterexample").
• Prioritize step-by-step logic ("draws conclusion from statistical evidence," "uses analogy to justify...").

Key Term: counterexample
A specific case or example that disputes a general claim or conclusion by demonstrating that the claim does not hold universally.

Revision Tip

For these question types, practice abstracting arguments into brief logical descriptions on scratch paper (e.g., "argument rebuts proposal by citing alternative cause"). Doing so speeds up answer elimination.

STRATEGIES FOR FLAWED VS. VALID METHOD QUESTIONS

• In "describe the reasoning" questions, focus on correct steps. If the argument is flawed, the correct answer still matches the intended logic—not necessarily the flaw.
• In flaw questions (e.g., "The argument is vulnerable to criticism because..."), match the reasoning error specifically (such as "confuses necessary for sufficient condition," "fails to consider alternative causes").

Worked Example 1.4

Stimulus: "Most professional runners eat pasta before races. Since Jordan ate pasta today, Jordan is a professional runner."

What is the flaw?

Answer:
The argument mistakes a sufficient condition for a necessary one (i.e., confuses a common behavior for an identifying criterion).

SUMMARY: QUESTION TYPES AND APPROACHES

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• Method of reasoning and argument strategy questions require describing abstract logic, not content
• Common method/strategy moves: applying general rules, offering analogies, raising counterexamples, rejecting proposals by practical evaluation
• Parallel reasoning questions focus on matching structure (and, for flaws, matching the error)
• For dialogue method questions, concentrate on the logical move in the response, such as offering an alternative explanation
• Process of elimination: eliminate choices that reference content or do not match each logical step

Key Terms and Concepts

• method of reasoning question
• argument structure
• reasoning pattern
• argument strategy
• parallel reasoning question
• counterexample