At first, the LSAT can seem overwhelming. Approaching questions with a series of calculated steps will help the task seem more manageable and save you time on the test. Too often, test-takers get drawn into the actual substance of the question, when the point is to understand the nature of the argument being developed. First read the question, which will tell you what’s actually being asked. This comes after the stimulus, or opening paragraph, which the question addresses. Read the stimulus second, scanning for all information that relates to the question. Try to predict an answer, then scan the choices.
Looking for the right answer to a test question sometimes means settling for the best answer rather than agonizing about finding the precise, exact solution. Because the LSAT knows that many test-takers will approach the test by reading the question, then the stimulus, then trying to predict the answer, you can shorten your approach after you predict the answer by looking for the two possible choices that meet it. Usually the LSAT knows your prediction and throws in a tricky similarity to trip you up. Find the two, then eliminate the worse one.
Logical fallacies crop up all over the legal profession, and testers want to see how well potential legal students do finding them on the test. There are many types of logical fallacy. The genetic fallacy, for instance, says something is bad because it comes from a bad place: For instance, the Volkswagen is bad because it was invented in Nazi Germany. A circular argument fallacy has no actual proof, but uses a separate claim as proof for another claim: Tyra Banks is beautiful because she has a pretty face. Other fallacies include the slippery slope, begging the claim, the hasty generalization and the either-or fallacy. Learn to identify these and others so you can pick them out on the test.
Looking for the conclusion is a simple exercise that will help you immeasurably. The conclusion often comes in the last sentence -- for example, “Political candidates’ speeches are loaded with promises and with expressions of good intention, but one must not forget that the politicians’ purpose in giving these speeches is to get themselves elected. Clearly, then, these speeches are selfishly motivated and the promises made in them are unreliable.” The final sentence is the conclusion that you must consider when determining the argument's validity. Don't be distracted by your agreement or disagreement with the premises that lead up to it; focus on deciding whether those premises support the conclusion.