# Logical Reasoning Questions for LSAT 2024: FREE Material, Solved Sample Questions

Author : Samriddhi Pandey

Updated On : May 13, 2024

SHARE

Reader's Digest: Have you decided to appear in LSAT India 2024? If so, read this blog for the LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions, including the most common types, solved sample questions and more!

The Logical Reasoning section of the LSAT India assesses your critical thinking abilities, which are crucial for deciphering complex arguments effectively.

This section includes questions to identify argument components, spot flaws, make conclusions, draw comparisons, and uncover assumptions underlying specific arguments.

While the questions may not necessarily be legal topics, they aim to evaluate your ability to dissect arguments. The LSAT Logical Reasoning section offers valuable insights into the test's format and content, along with practical tips for preparing and performing well in this section.

By solving LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions, you can boost your confidence, performance and improve your score Logical Reasoning for LSAT.

Here's what we'll be covering in this blog:

• List of LSAT Logical Reasoning Question Types: We'll break down the most common types of LSAT Logical Reasoning questions, explaining each type in detail.
• Solved LSAT Logical Reasoning Practice Questions: Explore the LSAT logical reasoning practice questions PDF to sharpen your skills.
• How to Answer LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions: Learn the systematic approach to tackle these questions effectively and improve your test-taking strategies.

## What are the Commonly Asked Types of LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions?

Here's a table listing various types of LSAT Logical Reasoning questions, along with explanations for each type:

Question Type Explanation
Assumption These questions ask you to identify unstated premises or assumptions in the argument that, if false, would weaken the argument's conclusion.
Weaken the Argument In these questions, you must find an answer choice that, if true, weakens or undermines the argument's conclusion.
Find the Flaw in the Argument These questions require you to identify and articulate the specific logical fallacy or error present in the argument.
Inference Inference questions ask you to draw a logical conclusion based on the information provided in the argument.
Parallel Flaw in the Argument You must identify another argument with a similar flaw or logical error as the one presented in the passage.
Method of Reasoning These questions ask you to determine the underlying structure or reasoning pattern employed in the argument.
Point at Issue You need to identify the specific point or issue of disagreement between two speakers or two parts of the argument.
Role Play Role-play questions involve evaluating a speaker's argument based on their role or perspective.
Strengthen Find an answer choice that, when added to the argument, makes the conclusion more likely to be true or the argument stronger.
Justify the Conclusion These questions ask you to select an answer that provides the best support or justification for the argument's conclusion.
Evaluate the Argument You must determine which answer choice, when considered in relation to the argument, would be the most relevant or informative.
Main Point Identify the primary conclusion or central idea of the argument.
Cannot be Inferred Determine which answer choice cannot be logically deduced from the information provided in the argument.
Principle These questions involve applying a general principle or rule to evaluate the argument's reasoning.
Parallel Reasoning Identify an argument that follows the same logical structure or reasoning pattern as the one in the passage.
Justify the Conclusion (JTC) Like regular "Justify the Conclusion" questions, these require you to select an answer that strongly supports the conclusion.

## Solved Sample LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions

Explore these solved samples of LSAT Logical Reasoning questions to enhance your test-taking skills and confidence in LSAT 2024.

Guidelines:

• In this section, every question is tied to the reasoning found in a short passage.
• When responding to these questions, avoid making unlikely or unnecessary assumptions that go against common sense or contradict the passage.
• While multiple choices might seem plausible for certain questions, select the one that offers the most precise and comprehensive response.

Question: Tara and Sam have different opinions regarding the importance of environmental conservation. Which statement best summarizes their disagreement?

A) They disagree on whether environmental conservation efforts should prioritize wildlife protection.

B) They disagree on whether environmental conservation contributes to a healthier planet.

C) They disagree on whether environmental conservation should be a global responsibility.

D) They disagree on whether environmental conservation has more significance than economic growth.

E) They disagree on whether environmental conservation initiatives are financially viable.

Explanation:

Tara and Sam's disagreement revolves around the significance of environmental conservation. Tara believes that environmental conservation is more important than economic growth, while Sam holds the opposite view.

Therefore, their main disagreement is whether environmental conservation has more significance than economic growth, making option D the correct choice.

Explore Now: Analytical Reasoning for LSAT

Question: Based on the executive's reasoning, which of the following accurately describes the executive's approach?

A. Predicts future events based on known causes.

B. Generalizes the probability of a specific event from information about the typical frequency of events.

C. Infers a statistical generalization from a large number of specific instances.

D. Draws a conclusion about an analogous case for which direct evidence is unavailable using a case with available direct evidence.

E. Predicts the intensity of a phenomenon based on facts about recent comparable events.

Explanation:

The executive's reasoning in this scenario involves using information about the consumer response to ads on a website to conclude the likely consumer response to print ads in the same magazine.

The two cases (website ads and print ads) are analogous, with one having direct evidence (website ads) and the other lacking direct evidence (print ads).

Therefore, the executive's approach aligns with option D, where they conclude an analogous case (print ads) for which direct evidence is unavailable using a case with available direct evidence (website ads).

Question: Which one of the following statements can be properly inferred from the passage?

A) Bridges built before about 1907 were built without thorough mathematical analysis and, therefore, were unsafe for the public.

B) Cooper’s absence from the Quebec Bridge construction site resulted in the breaking off of the cantilever.

C) Nineteenth-century bridge engineers relied on their rules of thumb because analytical methods were inadequate to solve their design problems.

D) Only a more rigorous application of mathematical analysis to the design of the Quebec Bridge could have prevented its collapse.

E) Before 1907, the mathematical analysis incorporated in engineering rules of thumb was insufficient to completely assure the safety of bridges under construction.

Explanation:

The passage implies that the engineering "rules of thumb" used before the Quebec Bridge disaster in 1907 were abandoned because they did not provide adequate safety assurance for bridges under construction.

Since the passage suggests that these rules of thumb were used in bridge building before 1907 and that they were insufficient for ensuring safety during construction, it can be inferred that before 1907, the mathematical analysis within these rules of thumb was not enough to completely ensure the safety of bridges under construction.

Therefore, option E is the correct answer.

Options A and C go beyond the scope of the passage, making broader claims about the safety of bridges before 1907 and the reasons behind the reliance on rules of thumb without direct support from the text.

Option B makes a specific claim about Cooper's absence causing the cantilever's break-off, which is not supported by the passage. The passage does not suggest that Cooper's presence could have necessarily prevented the disaster.

Option D implies that only one specific solution could have prevented the collapse, which is not explicitly stated in the passage. The passage suggests that a more rigorous application of mathematical analysis could have helped, but it does not rule out other potential preventive measures.

Question: The archaeological discovery of ancient pottery fragments in a remote cave suggests the presence of a prehistoric civilization in the area. However, critics argue that the pottery might have been placed there much later by modern humans exploring the cave.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument favouring pottery's connection to a prehistoric civilization?

A. The cave has been sealed off from external access for centuries, making it unlikely for modern humans to have entered.

B. Radiocarbon dating of the pottery fragments confirms their age to be consistent with prehistoric times.

C. Similar pottery fragments from the same civilization have been found in other caves across the region.

D. Modern explorers have discovered numerous other artefacts in the cave that are of recent origin.

E. The cave's environmental conditions, including temperature and humidity, are conducive to preserving ancient artefacts.

Explanation:

This question asks you to find the option that most strengthens the argument for the connection between the discovered pottery fragments and a prehistoric civilization. The argument is challenged by critics who suggest that modern humans might have placed the pottery in the cave. To strengthen the argument, we need evidence that supports the idea that the pottery is indeed from prehistoric times.

Option (B) is the correct choice because it provides evidence that the radiocarbon dating of the pottery fragments confirms their age to be consistent with prehistoric times. This strengthens the argument by directly addressing the doubt raised by the critics.

Option (A) is a relevant piece of information but doesn't directly confirm the age of the pottery. It simply suggests that modern humans might not have placed the pottery there, which is a weaker connection to the argument.

Option (C) talks about finding similar pottery fragments in other caves but doesn't address the age or origin of the pottery in question, so it doesn't strengthen the argument.

Option (D) mentions modern explorers finding recent artefacts, which contradicts the argument but doesn't provide direct evidence about the age of the discovered pottery.

Option (E) discusses environmental conditions but doesn't provide information about the age or origin of the pottery, so it doesn't strengthen the argument either.

Don't Miss - How To Improve Your LSAT India Score 2024?

Question: Economist: Tariffs on imported goods are necessary to protect domestic industries. Without tariffs, foreign products would flood the market, leading to job losses and economic instability. Therefore, tariffs are essential for maintaining a stable economy.

The reasoning in the economist's argument is flawed because it

(A) assumes that foreign products will always dominate the market without tariffs

(B) overlooks the potential negative consequences of tariffs, such as higher consumer prices

(C) fails to provide historical evidence to support the claim that tariffs are necessary for economic stability

(D) presumes that tariffs are the only means to protect domestic industries

(E) relies on personal opinions rather than objective economic data

Explanation:

This question requires you to identify the flaw in the economist's argument. The economist argues that tariffs are necessary to protect domestic industries and maintain economic stability. However, the argument does not consider the potential negative consequences of tariffs, such as higher consumer prices (choice B).

While tariffs may protect domestic industries, they can also lead to increased consumer costs, which can have adverse economic effects. Therefore, the economist's argument is flawed for overlooking these potential negative consequences.

Choice A assumes a specific outcome (foreign products dominating the market) without considering other factors, but this does not necessarily undermine the argument's reasoning.

Choice C requests historical evidence, but the absence of historical evidence does not necessarily make the argument flawed. The argument is based on economic reasoning rather than historical examples.

Choice D suggests that tariffs are the only means to protect domestic industries, but the argument does not explicitly state this. The economist argues for the necessity of tariffs but does not rule out other possible methods.

Choice E accuses the economist of relying on personal opinions, but the argument is presented as an economic assertion, not a personal opinion.

Therefore, the correct answer is (B) because it identifies a significant flaw in the economist's reasoning: the failure to consider the potential negative consequences of tariffs.

Find Out: LSAT India Syllabus

Question: A company produces environmentally friendly cleaning products that are more expensive than conventional ones. To offset the higher costs and remain profitable, they charge higher prices for these products. Some argue that this practice is unjustified. However, one principle, if valid, must help to justify the company's reasoning.

Which of the following principles does that?

A) Businesses should prioritize environmental sustainability over profits.

B) Companies should set prices based on the manufacturing costs alone.

C) Consumers should be willing to pay more for products that have a lower environmental impact.

D) All cleaning products should be sold at the same price to ensure fairness.

E) Companies should reduce the manufacturing costs of environmentally friendly products.

Explanation:

The company charges higher prices for environmentally friendly cleaning products to cover manufacturing costs. The question asks for a principle that would help justify this practice.

The principle in response (C) states that consumers should be willing to pay more for products that have a lower environmental impact. This principle aligns with the company's practice of charging higher prices for environmentally friendly products, as it suggests that there is a market-based justification for the pricing strategy. It supports the company's reasoning if consumers value the environmental benefits and are willing to pay more for them. Thus, (C) is the correct response.

Response (A) suggests that businesses should prioritize environmental sustainability over profits, which does not align with the company's need to cover higher manufacturing costs. This principle would actually oppose the company's pricing strategy.

Response (B) suggests that companies should set prices based on manufacturing costs alone, which would not justify the company's practice of charging higher prices to cover the higher manufacturing costs of environmentally friendly products.

Response (D) proposes that all cleaning products should be sold at the same price to ensure fairness, which contradicts the company's approach of pricing products based on their manufacturing costs.

Response (E) suggests that companies should reduce the manufacturing costs of environmentally friendly products, which, while a valid strategy, does not address the justification for the company's current pricing strategy.

Read Also: LSAT Critical Reasoning Questions

## How to Solve LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions?

Solving LSAT Logical Reasoning questions requires a systematic approach and practice. Here's a step-by-step method to help you tackle these questions effectively:

• Start by reading the passage attentively. Understand the context, the argument's structure, and the author's main point.
• Take note of any keywords, phrases, or terms that seem crucial to the argument.

Identify the Question Type:

• Determine the type of Logical Reasoning question you're dealing with (e.g., Assumption, Weaken, Inference, Strengthen, etc.). This helps you approach the question strategically.

• Before looking at the answer choices, anticipate what kind of information or reasoning would strengthen, weaken, or answer the question based on the question stem.

• Go through the answer choices one by one.
• Eliminate clearly incorrect choices first. Pay attention to extreme language (e.g., "always," "never") and irrelevant options.
• For questions that ask you to strengthen or weaken the argument, assess how each answer choice affects the argument's logic.
• For questions that ask you to find flaws, determine whether the answer choice correctly identifies a problem in the argument.

Use the POE Technique:

• If you're uncertain about an answer, use the Process of Elimination (POE) to narrow your choices. Cross out answers you're confident are wrong.

Be Mindful of Time:

• Keep an eye on the time. LSAT Logical Reasoning questions are timed, so don't get stuck on a single question. If you're struggling with one, move on and return to it if time allows.

Refer Back to the Passage:

• When necessary, refer back to the passage to confirm details or ensure your answer aligns with the information presented.

Avoid Assumptions:

• Don't make assumptions that are not supported by the passage. Base your answer on the information provided.

Practice Regularly:

• Practice is key to improving your LSAT Logical Reasoning skills. Work through various question types to become familiar with different scenarios and reasoning patterns.

• After completing practice sets or exams, review the questions you got wrong. Understand why you made mistakes and learn from them.

Develop a Timing Strategy:

• Develop a timing strategy that works for you. Decide how much time you should allocate to each question, and stick to it during practice sessions.

Find More: LSAT Books

## Conclusion

In conclusion, mastering LSAT Logical Reasoning is essential for success in the LSAT India 2024 exam. This blog provides valuable insights into the types of questions you can expect, along with explanations and sample questions to enhance your skills. Here are the key takeaways:

• Familiarize yourself with the various question types, from Assumption to Parallel Reasoning.
• Practice solving sample LSAT Logical Reasoning sample questions to refine your test-taking abilities.
• Understand the principles and reasoning behind each question to approach them systematically.
• Avoid making unwarranted assumptions, and be mindful of time management during the exam.
• Strengthen your arguments with relevant evidence and be aware of potential flaws in reasoning.
• Regularly solving LSAT logical reasoning practice questions with answers and review of mistakes are essential for improvement.

What are the most common LSAT logical reasoning questions?

Is LSAT logical reasoning hard?

What percentage of the LSAT is logical reasoning?

What is the hardest section of LSAT?

How many types of logical reasoning questions are on the LSAT?

What is the most common type of logic game on the LSAT?

What is the easiest type of the LSAT Logical Reasoning Question?

# Logical Reasoning Questions for LSAT 2024: FREE Material, Solved Sample Questions

Author : Samriddhi Pandey

May 13, 2024

SHARE

Reader's Digest: Have you decided to appear in LSAT India 2024? If so, read this blog for the LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions, including the most common types, solved sample questions and more!

The Logical Reasoning section of the LSAT India assesses your critical thinking abilities, which are crucial for deciphering complex arguments effectively.

This section includes questions to identify argument components, spot flaws, make conclusions, draw comparisons, and uncover assumptions underlying specific arguments.

While the questions may not necessarily be legal topics, they aim to evaluate your ability to dissect arguments. The LSAT Logical Reasoning section offers valuable insights into the test's format and content, along with practical tips for preparing and performing well in this section.

By solving LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions, you can boost your confidence, performance and improve your score Logical Reasoning for LSAT.

Here's what we'll be covering in this blog:

• List of LSAT Logical Reasoning Question Types: We'll break down the most common types of LSAT Logical Reasoning questions, explaining each type in detail.
• Solved LSAT Logical Reasoning Practice Questions: Explore the LSAT logical reasoning practice questions PDF to sharpen your skills.
• How to Answer LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions: Learn the systematic approach to tackle these questions effectively and improve your test-taking strategies.

## What are the Commonly Asked Types of LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions?

Here's a table listing various types of LSAT Logical Reasoning questions, along with explanations for each type:

Question Type Explanation
Assumption These questions ask you to identify unstated premises or assumptions in the argument that, if false, would weaken the argument's conclusion.
Weaken the Argument In these questions, you must find an answer choice that, if true, weakens or undermines the argument's conclusion.
Find the Flaw in the Argument These questions require you to identify and articulate the specific logical fallacy or error present in the argument.
Inference Inference questions ask you to draw a logical conclusion based on the information provided in the argument.
Parallel Flaw in the Argument You must identify another argument with a similar flaw or logical error as the one presented in the passage.
Method of Reasoning These questions ask you to determine the underlying structure or reasoning pattern employed in the argument.
Point at Issue You need to identify the specific point or issue of disagreement between two speakers or two parts of the argument.
Role Play Role-play questions involve evaluating a speaker's argument based on their role or perspective.
Strengthen Find an answer choice that, when added to the argument, makes the conclusion more likely to be true or the argument stronger.
Justify the Conclusion These questions ask you to select an answer that provides the best support or justification for the argument's conclusion.
Evaluate the Argument You must determine which answer choice, when considered in relation to the argument, would be the most relevant or informative.
Main Point Identify the primary conclusion or central idea of the argument.
Cannot be Inferred Determine which answer choice cannot be logically deduced from the information provided in the argument.
Principle These questions involve applying a general principle or rule to evaluate the argument's reasoning.
Parallel Reasoning Identify an argument that follows the same logical structure or reasoning pattern as the one in the passage.
Justify the Conclusion (JTC) Like regular "Justify the Conclusion" questions, these require you to select an answer that strongly supports the conclusion.

## Solved Sample LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions

Explore these solved samples of LSAT Logical Reasoning questions to enhance your test-taking skills and confidence in LSAT 2024.

Guidelines:

• In this section, every question is tied to the reasoning found in a short passage.
• When responding to these questions, avoid making unlikely or unnecessary assumptions that go against common sense or contradict the passage.
• While multiple choices might seem plausible for certain questions, select the one that offers the most precise and comprehensive response.

Question: Tara and Sam have different opinions regarding the importance of environmental conservation. Which statement best summarizes their disagreement?

A) They disagree on whether environmental conservation efforts should prioritize wildlife protection.

B) They disagree on whether environmental conservation contributes to a healthier planet.

C) They disagree on whether environmental conservation should be a global responsibility.

D) They disagree on whether environmental conservation has more significance than economic growth.

E) They disagree on whether environmental conservation initiatives are financially viable.

Explanation:

Tara and Sam's disagreement revolves around the significance of environmental conservation. Tara believes that environmental conservation is more important than economic growth, while Sam holds the opposite view.

Therefore, their main disagreement is whether environmental conservation has more significance than economic growth, making option D the correct choice.

Explore Now: Analytical Reasoning for LSAT

Question: Based on the executive's reasoning, which of the following accurately describes the executive's approach?

A. Predicts future events based on known causes.

B. Generalizes the probability of a specific event from information about the typical frequency of events.

C. Infers a statistical generalization from a large number of specific instances.

D. Draws a conclusion about an analogous case for which direct evidence is unavailable using a case with available direct evidence.

E. Predicts the intensity of a phenomenon based on facts about recent comparable events.

Explanation:

The executive's reasoning in this scenario involves using information about the consumer response to ads on a website to conclude the likely consumer response to print ads in the same magazine.

The two cases (website ads and print ads) are analogous, with one having direct evidence (website ads) and the other lacking direct evidence (print ads).

Therefore, the executive's approach aligns with option D, where they conclude an analogous case (print ads) for which direct evidence is unavailable using a case with available direct evidence (website ads).

Question: Which one of the following statements can be properly inferred from the passage?

A) Bridges built before about 1907 were built without thorough mathematical analysis and, therefore, were unsafe for the public.

B) Cooper’s absence from the Quebec Bridge construction site resulted in the breaking off of the cantilever.

C) Nineteenth-century bridge engineers relied on their rules of thumb because analytical methods were inadequate to solve their design problems.

D) Only a more rigorous application of mathematical analysis to the design of the Quebec Bridge could have prevented its collapse.

E) Before 1907, the mathematical analysis incorporated in engineering rules of thumb was insufficient to completely assure the safety of bridges under construction.

Explanation:

The passage implies that the engineering "rules of thumb" used before the Quebec Bridge disaster in 1907 were abandoned because they did not provide adequate safety assurance for bridges under construction.

Since the passage suggests that these rules of thumb were used in bridge building before 1907 and that they were insufficient for ensuring safety during construction, it can be inferred that before 1907, the mathematical analysis within these rules of thumb was not enough to completely ensure the safety of bridges under construction.

Therefore, option E is the correct answer.

Options A and C go beyond the scope of the passage, making broader claims about the safety of bridges before 1907 and the reasons behind the reliance on rules of thumb without direct support from the text.

Option B makes a specific claim about Cooper's absence causing the cantilever's break-off, which is not supported by the passage. The passage does not suggest that Cooper's presence could have necessarily prevented the disaster.

Option D implies that only one specific solution could have prevented the collapse, which is not explicitly stated in the passage. The passage suggests that a more rigorous application of mathematical analysis could have helped, but it does not rule out other potential preventive measures.

Question: The archaeological discovery of ancient pottery fragments in a remote cave suggests the presence of a prehistoric civilization in the area. However, critics argue that the pottery might have been placed there much later by modern humans exploring the cave.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument favouring pottery's connection to a prehistoric civilization?

A. The cave has been sealed off from external access for centuries, making it unlikely for modern humans to have entered.

B. Radiocarbon dating of the pottery fragments confirms their age to be consistent with prehistoric times.

C. Similar pottery fragments from the same civilization have been found in other caves across the region.

D. Modern explorers have discovered numerous other artefacts in the cave that are of recent origin.

E. The cave's environmental conditions, including temperature and humidity, are conducive to preserving ancient artefacts.

Explanation:

This question asks you to find the option that most strengthens the argument for the connection between the discovered pottery fragments and a prehistoric civilization. The argument is challenged by critics who suggest that modern humans might have placed the pottery in the cave. To strengthen the argument, we need evidence that supports the idea that the pottery is indeed from prehistoric times.

Option (B) is the correct choice because it provides evidence that the radiocarbon dating of the pottery fragments confirms their age to be consistent with prehistoric times. This strengthens the argument by directly addressing the doubt raised by the critics.

Option (A) is a relevant piece of information but doesn't directly confirm the age of the pottery. It simply suggests that modern humans might not have placed the pottery there, which is a weaker connection to the argument.

Option (C) talks about finding similar pottery fragments in other caves but doesn't address the age or origin of the pottery in question, so it doesn't strengthen the argument.

Option (D) mentions modern explorers finding recent artefacts, which contradicts the argument but doesn't provide direct evidence about the age of the discovered pottery.

Option (E) discusses environmental conditions but doesn't provide information about the age or origin of the pottery, so it doesn't strengthen the argument either.

Don't Miss - How To Improve Your LSAT India Score 2024?

Question: Economist: Tariffs on imported goods are necessary to protect domestic industries. Without tariffs, foreign products would flood the market, leading to job losses and economic instability. Therefore, tariffs are essential for maintaining a stable economy.

The reasoning in the economist's argument is flawed because it

(A) assumes that foreign products will always dominate the market without tariffs

(B) overlooks the potential negative consequences of tariffs, such as higher consumer prices

(C) fails to provide historical evidence to support the claim that tariffs are necessary for economic stability

(D) presumes that tariffs are the only means to protect domestic industries

(E) relies on personal opinions rather than objective economic data

Explanation:

This question requires you to identify the flaw in the economist's argument. The economist argues that tariffs are necessary to protect domestic industries and maintain economic stability. However, the argument does not consider the potential negative consequences of tariffs, such as higher consumer prices (choice B).

While tariffs may protect domestic industries, they can also lead to increased consumer costs, which can have adverse economic effects. Therefore, the economist's argument is flawed for overlooking these potential negative consequences.

Choice A assumes a specific outcome (foreign products dominating the market) without considering other factors, but this does not necessarily undermine the argument's reasoning.

Choice C requests historical evidence, but the absence of historical evidence does not necessarily make the argument flawed. The argument is based on economic reasoning rather than historical examples.

Choice D suggests that tariffs are the only means to protect domestic industries, but the argument does not explicitly state this. The economist argues for the necessity of tariffs but does not rule out other possible methods.

Choice E accuses the economist of relying on personal opinions, but the argument is presented as an economic assertion, not a personal opinion.

Therefore, the correct answer is (B) because it identifies a significant flaw in the economist's reasoning: the failure to consider the potential negative consequences of tariffs.

Find Out: LSAT India Syllabus

Question: A company produces environmentally friendly cleaning products that are more expensive than conventional ones. To offset the higher costs and remain profitable, they charge higher prices for these products. Some argue that this practice is unjustified. However, one principle, if valid, must help to justify the company's reasoning.

Which of the following principles does that?

A) Businesses should prioritize environmental sustainability over profits.

B) Companies should set prices based on the manufacturing costs alone.

C) Consumers should be willing to pay more for products that have a lower environmental impact.

D) All cleaning products should be sold at the same price to ensure fairness.

E) Companies should reduce the manufacturing costs of environmentally friendly products.

Explanation:

The company charges higher prices for environmentally friendly cleaning products to cover manufacturing costs. The question asks for a principle that would help justify this practice.

The principle in response (C) states that consumers should be willing to pay more for products that have a lower environmental impact. This principle aligns with the company's practice of charging higher prices for environmentally friendly products, as it suggests that there is a market-based justification for the pricing strategy. It supports the company's reasoning if consumers value the environmental benefits and are willing to pay more for them. Thus, (C) is the correct response.

Response (A) suggests that businesses should prioritize environmental sustainability over profits, which does not align with the company's need to cover higher manufacturing costs. This principle would actually oppose the company's pricing strategy.

Response (B) suggests that companies should set prices based on manufacturing costs alone, which would not justify the company's practice of charging higher prices to cover the higher manufacturing costs of environmentally friendly products.

Response (D) proposes that all cleaning products should be sold at the same price to ensure fairness, which contradicts the company's approach of pricing products based on their manufacturing costs.

Response (E) suggests that companies should reduce the manufacturing costs of environmentally friendly products, which, while a valid strategy, does not address the justification for the company's current pricing strategy.

Read Also: LSAT Critical Reasoning Questions

## How to Solve LSAT Logical Reasoning Questions?

Solving LSAT Logical Reasoning questions requires a systematic approach and practice. Here's a step-by-step method to help you tackle these questions effectively:

• Start by reading the passage attentively. Understand the context, the argument's structure, and the author's main point.
• Take note of any keywords, phrases, or terms that seem crucial to the argument.

Identify the Question Type:

• Determine the type of Logical Reasoning question you're dealing with (e.g., Assumption, Weaken, Inference, Strengthen, etc.). This helps you approach the question strategically.

• Before looking at the answer choices, anticipate what kind of information or reasoning would strengthen, weaken, or answer the question based on the question stem.

• Go through the answer choices one by one.
• Eliminate clearly incorrect choices first. Pay attention to extreme language (e.g., "always," "never") and irrelevant options.
• For questions that ask you to strengthen or weaken the argument, assess how each answer choice affects the argument's logic.
• For questions that ask you to find flaws, determine whether the answer choice correctly identifies a problem in the argument.

Use the POE Technique:

• If you're uncertain about an answer, use the Process of Elimination (POE) to narrow your choices. Cross out answers you're confident are wrong.

Be Mindful of Time:

• Keep an eye on the time. LSAT Logical Reasoning questions are timed, so don't get stuck on a single question. If you're struggling with one, move on and return to it if time allows.

Refer Back to the Passage:

• When necessary, refer back to the passage to confirm details or ensure your answer aligns with the information presented.

Avoid Assumptions:

• Don't make assumptions that are not supported by the passage. Base your answer on the information provided.

Practice Regularly:

• Practice is key to improving your LSAT Logical Reasoning skills. Work through various question types to become familiar with different scenarios and reasoning patterns.

• After completing practice sets or exams, review the questions you got wrong. Understand why you made mistakes and learn from them.

Develop a Timing Strategy:

• Develop a timing strategy that works for you. Decide how much time you should allocate to each question, and stick to it during practice sessions.

Find More: LSAT Books

## Conclusion

In conclusion, mastering LSAT Logical Reasoning is essential for success in the LSAT India 2024 exam. This blog provides valuable insights into the types of questions you can expect, along with explanations and sample questions to enhance your skills. Here are the key takeaways:

• Familiarize yourself with the various question types, from Assumption to Parallel Reasoning.
• Practice solving sample LSAT Logical Reasoning sample questions to refine your test-taking abilities.
• Understand the principles and reasoning behind each question to approach them systematically.
• Avoid making unwarranted assumptions, and be mindful of time management during the exam.
• Strengthen your arguments with relevant evidence and be aware of potential flaws in reasoning.
• Regularly solving LSAT logical reasoning practice questions with answers and review of mistakes are essential for improvement.

What are the most common LSAT logical reasoning questions?

Is LSAT logical reasoning hard?

What percentage of the LSAT is logical reasoning?

What is the hardest section of LSAT?

How many types of logical reasoning questions are on the LSAT?

What is the most common type of logic game on the LSAT?

What is the easiest type of the LSAT Logical Reasoning Question?

Toprankers, launched in 2016, is Indiaâ€™s most preferred digital counselling & preparation platform for careers beyond engineering & medicine. We envision to build awareness and increase the success rate for lucrative career options after 12th. We offer best learning practices and end-to-end support to every student preparing for management, humanities, law, judiciary & design entrances.

E

: support@toprankers.com

P

: +91-7676564400

Social Channels