LSAT考试科目之逻辑推理官方介绍

LSAT考试由五个35分钟的section组成，这些section包括1个阅读理解、1个分析推理和2个逻辑推理，以及一个不计入成绩的加试section。加试有可能是上述任一种题型。

　　LSAT逻辑推理题目主要依据短小的论证，回答一个问题(非常偶尔可能会是两道题)。以下是LSAC官网给出的LSAT逻辑推理题目的介绍：

　　Arguments are a fundamental part of the law, and analyzing arguments is a key element of legal analysis. Training in the law builds on a foundation of basic reasoning skills. Law students must draw on the skills of analyzing, evaluating, constructing, and refuting arguments. They need to be able to identify what information is relevant to an issue or argument and what impact further evidence might have. They need to be able to reconcile opposing positions and use arguments to persuade others.

　　Logical Reasoning questions evaluate the ability to analyze, critically evaluate, and complete arguments as they occur in ordinary language. The questions are based on short arguments drawn from a wide variety of sources, including newspapers, general interest magazines, scholarly publications, advertisements, and informal discourse. These arguments mirror legal reasoning in the types of arguments presented and in their complexity, though few of the arguments actually have law as a subject matter.

　　Each Logical Reasoning question requires you to read and comprehend a short passage, then answer one question (or, rarely, two questions) about it. The questions are designed to assess a wide range of skills involved in thinking critically, with an emphasis on skills that are central to legal reasoning.

　　These skills include:

　　Recognizing the parts of an argument and their relationships

　　Recognizing similarities and differences between patterns of reasoning

　　Drawing well-supported conclusions

　　Reasoning by analogy

　　Recognizing misunderstandings or points of disagreement

　　Determining how additional evidence affects an argument

　　Detecting assumptions made by particular arguments

　　Identifying and applying principles or rules

　　Identifying flaws in arguments

　　Identifying explanations

　　The questions do not presuppose specialized knowledge of logical terminology. For example, you will not be expected to know the meaning of specialized terms such as “ad hominem” or “syllogism.” On the other hand, you will be expected to understand and critique the reasoning contained in arguments. This requires that you possess a university-level understanding of widely used concepts such as argument, premise, assumption, and conclusion.