In my previous blog post I talked about the basics of conditional reasoning on the LSAT, and dealt with fairly simple statements involving a single sufficient condition and a single necessary condition. You’ll find that post here:
On the LSAT, though, things are not always that simple! Sometimes (often, really) you will encounter conditional chains, where one thing is sufficient for another, which is sufficient for a third, which is sufficient for a fourth. Stringing these conditional claims together in the right order, and then knowing which conditions affect others and in what ways, will be crucial to your success. You will encounter chains in Must Be True questions, Parallel Reasoning, Parallel Flaw, Justify the Conclusion, and others. So, how do you manage to interpret the relationships correctly?
By playing with dominoes!Read More