If you have been studying for the LSAT, you understand how important the details are. Sometimes a single word can make or break an answer choice. For this reason, it's crucial to learn some common ways the LSAT will use language that can be misleading if we don't ready carefully. Here are some terms to look out for when reading passages and answer choices.
Terms about BELIEF
Just because someone believes something does not mean it is true. For example, suppose I believe that I am immortal. Does that make it true? Absolutely not!
But this is exactly what the LSAT will try to make you think. This can especially become tricky in the answer choices. Whenever you see language like "Many scientists believe...", remember their belief is not necessarily true. Even though it may be tempting to lend their belief credibility, remember that scientists have been wrong in the past on certain things, and maybe other scientists disagree.
Terms about OPINION
These terms are similar to statements about belief, but there is a subtle difference. Opinionated statements determine whether someone feels positively or negatively towards a subject or event. For example, if I believe it will rain tomorrow, my opinion or tone is unknown. It's unclear whether I like the rain. But if I think it is good that it will rain tomorrow, I feel positively about it. Other opinionated terms include should, warranted, advisable, and beneficial.
Like statements of belief, what I feel positively about has no bearing on whether it will or has actually happened. For example, we all have met someone who should eat healthier, but they still decided not to.
So don't confuse opinion with fact. If the conclusion of the argument is that we should do something, be skeptical of answer choices that discuss whether it has happened.
Terms about PROBABILITY/QUANTITY
If it will probably rain tomorrow, it is still totally possible that it might not. Words like 'probably' and 'maybe', indicate that it is not 100% certain. By using this term, we have allowed for the possibility of the event not happening.
So, if a conclusion said that it will probably rain tomorrow, an answer that said it might not rain would not affect the argument because that possibility is already implied by the statement.
Similarly, if a conclusion stated that some people enjoy travelling, it is implied that some people might not enjoy it.
Side note: To learn more about the precise meaning of these terms, check out my post on quantifiers.
If you found this post helpful, feel free to sign up for more free LSAT tips and flashcards!
Comments