Free Courses › Logical Reasoning

Read arguments like a lawyer · Lesson 1 of 14

What Logical Reasoning actually tests

After this lesson, you can find an argument's conclusion first, work answer choices through a 3-step process, and eliminate the 5 most common trap answers.

30 min video, plus notes and 1 practice question below

In this lesson

• Find an argument's conclusion by asking "what's the point?" before worrying about the question type
• Work answer choices in 3 steps: rephrase the stimulus in plain English, make a rough prediction, then eliminate aggressively
• Recognize the 5 traps built into wrong answers: fancy vocabulary, a near-miss with 1 extreme word, background noise, feel-good fluff, and out-of-scope claims
• Recover from a mid-section freeze with a 3-part plan: skim for the core, flag and move after 30 to 45 seconds, then gut-check the choices for red flags
• Review in small sets of 5 to 10 questions and log 5 things per question so you can spot and fix repeating mistakes

Start every question with one question: what's the point?

Before you worry about question types, assumptions, or flaws, find the conclusion. Read the stimulus once and ask, "what's the point?" What is this person trying to convince you of? Take this stimulus: several residents reported nausea after eating at a food truck, but health inspections found no violations, so the nausea was likely caused by something else. The point is simple: they think the food truck didn't cause the nausea. You don't need to evaluate the inspection process or diagnose the nausea to get that.

Try another one: a survey found 65% of commuters prefer podcasts during their drive, but audiobook sales increased significantly, so the survey results must be inaccurate. The point: they think the survey is wrong. You don't need to analyze the sales data or care how the survey was conducted, you just need to know what they're arguing. Even when the question stem asks something else, like what assumption the argument relies on, you still need the point first, because every assumption connects back to the conclusion.

The 3-step process for answer choices

Once you have the point, work the answer choices in 3 steps. First, rephrase the stimulus in plain English, the same way you'd explain it to a friend. If the stimulus says new safety regulations reduced factory injuries but productivity dropped, so the regulations must be hurting efficiency, just say "safety rules came in, output dropped, so maybe the rules are to blame." Second, make a rough prediction about what the argument is assuming, in this case, that nothing else changed. It doesn't need to be precise, it just needs to narrow the field so you're not evaluating all 5 choices from scratch.

Third, eliminate aggressively instead of hunting for the single "best" answer. Cut choices that are too strong (watch for always, must, only), choices that are out of scope (they introduce an idea the stimulus never raised), and choices that sound good but do nothing (vague, academic-sounding language that never actually touches the argument). If you're stuck between 2 choices, ask which one directly interacts with the core point, not which one sounds smarter or longer.

5 traps built to catch strong readers

The fancy-word trap uses dense phrases like "causal generalization across populations" that sound impressive but don't make sense on a second read. If a choice leaves you thinking "huh?", it's usually wrong. The near-miss trap gives you an answer that's 95% right, then slips in 1 extreme word like must, always, or only if that makes it too rigid. Correct answers tend to use softer language, some, often, may, could, because most stimulus arguments aren't extreme either.

The background-noise trap offers a choice that's true but doesn't attack or support the argument's reasoning at all. The feel-good trap sounds smart and vaguely relevant, phrases like "this underscores the importance of future research," but never touches the logic. And the out-of-scope trap answers a different question entirely, like citing a beverage industry's lobbying spending when the stimulus is about a school drink ban. For each of these, ask, "does this choice deal with the same conversation the stimulus started?" If not, it's out.

What to do when you blank out mid-section

If you freeze on a question, don't reread the stimulus 5 times hoping it clicks. Skim it once calmly, and ask only for the main point, not full clarity. If you still don't have a basic idea of what the argument is saying within 30 to 45 seconds, flag the question and move on. The next question isn't guaranteed to be harder, and coming back later with a clear head often works better than grinding in place.

If you return to a flagged question and it's still foggy, do a fast scan of the choices for red flags instead of rereading again: extreme words (always, never, must, only if), new concepts the stimulus never raised, and fluff that sounds fancy but does nothing. Eliminate what you can and take your best remaining guess. A 50/50 guess after cutting 3 bad choices beats a blind guess among 5 every time.

Review in a way that actually builds skill

Doing dozens of questions a day without review doesn't build the skill, it just repeats the same mistakes with more confidence. Instead, work in small sets of 5 to 10 questions under real timing, small enough that you can still remember your thinking on each one afterward.

After each question, right or wrong, write down 5 things: what the argument was about in your own words, what you predicted, why you picked the answer you picked, why the correct answer is better, and what trap, if any, you fell for. Track these notes over time and look for repeating patterns, like consistently missing one question type or falling for extreme language. Once you can name the pattern, you can fix it.

The short version

• If a trap answer sounds smart but never touches what the author's trying to prove, that's your sign you skipped the point step, so go back to it before you pick.
• When you're stuck between 2 choices, pick the one that directly interacts with the core point, not the one that sounds longer or smarter.
• When you catch yourself using the flag-and-move plan on a timed set, log it. If you're flagging more than 2 questions a section, the problem isn't 1 hard question, it's timing pressure building up before you get there.

Mark lesson 1 complete