Arguments & Their Parts
Every Logical Reasoning question starts the same way: find the conclusion, then see how the premises try to hold it up. Test-takers who skip that step read answer choices blind. This deck drills argument anatomy until it is automatic — conclusion and premise indicator words, unstated assumptions, intermediate conclusions and concessions — the shared skeleton underneath strengthen, weaken, flaw and assumption questions alike.
Practice this set for free — no account needed. Loads 13 flashcards into the learner.
Practice in the free learnerHow to study this set
When a card gives you an indicator word, answer with what FOLLOWS it — "therefore" is only useful because a conclusion comes after it. Practise the "why?" test out loud: state the conclusion, ask why, and check that the premises answer. If they do not, you have picked the wrong sentence as the conclusion.
All 13 flashcards
What is a premise?
A statement offered as evidence or support for the conclusion. Premises are accepted as given on the LSAT — you attack the reasoning, not the facts.
What is the conclusion of an argument?
The claim the argument exists to establish — what the author wants you to accept. Everything else is there to support it.
Name the classic conclusion-indicator words.
"Therefore", "thus", "hence", "so", "consequently", "it follows that" — the conclusion comes right after them.
Name the classic premise-indicator words.
"Because", "since", "for", "after all", "given that" — what follows them is support, not the conclusion.
What is an assumption, in LSAT terms?
An unstated premise the argument needs to work — the invisible plank between the stated premises and the conclusion.
What is an intermediate (subsidiary) conclusion?
A statement that is supported by premises AND itself supports the main conclusion — it plays both roles at once.
What is a concession — often introduced with "admittedly" or "granted"?
A point for the OTHER side that the author acknowledges before pressing on — it is neither a premise for nor the conclusion of the author's argument.
What is the "why?" test for finding the main conclusion?
State a candidate sentence and ask "why?" — if other sentences in the stimulus answer that question, you have the conclusion; if nothing supports it, keep looking.
Does every LSAT stimulus contain an argument?
No — many are just sets of facts with no conclusion drawn. Those pair with inference/must-be-true stems rather than flaw or strengthen stems.
What is a principle, in LSAT stimuli?
A general rule ("one should never…") that an argument applies to a specific case — principle questions test whether rule and case genuinely match.
Why do quantifiers like "some", "most" and "all" matter so much?
Because the strength of a claim decides what can follow from it: "some" claims are weak and easy to prove; "all" claims are strong and easy to break. Conclusions cannot be stronger than their premises.
What role does background/context information play in a stimulus?
It sets the stage — it is neither premise nor conclusion, and wrong answers love to promote it into one.
Valid vs strong: what is the difference between deductive and inductive support?
Deductive: if the premises are true, the conclusion MUST be true (valid). Inductive: the premises make the conclusion more probable (strong) but never guarantee it.
What to learn next
Once you can dissect an argument in seconds, level 3, "Common Logical Flaws", teaches you the standard ways those arguments go wrong — the patterns the LSAT reuses test after test.
Continue to Level 3: Common Logical Flaws →