Logical Reasoning – Beyond the Scope?
A common thread I’ve seen among students focusing on the Logical Reasoning section is that they often miss questions where the correct answer is one that introduces material not found in the passage – that is to say, it goes “beyond the scope” of the initial reading.
Invariably, these students have done some good prep on their own, or taken a class, and they have learned (correctly) that it’s very common for a wrong answer to introduce new material. In fact, that’s often a good way to eliminate answer choices. But it appears that the sources that have taught students about that concept have taken it a bit too far – there are questions in which the right answer DOES introduce new material. In fact, there are times where a right answer almost HAS TO introduce new material.
It all comes down to the question type. The most common question type in which the advice to avoid new material is spot-on is the “find the conclusion” question. Many, many LSAT questions are of this type, and the conclusion will flow from the premises – which will be given in the passage – so an answer choice that presents new material will be wrong. But there are other question types. For instance, a “find the flaw” question is a GREAT candidate for a correct answer that introduces new material. Consider – one of the more common “flaws” is that the speaker fails to consider an alternative explanation. So of course the “flaw” won’t appear in the passage – the reason the passage is flawed is because it’s not in there! I’m going to update this entry and include some examples from past LSATs so you can see what I mean in practice. But for now, be sure to ask yourself…Is this the kind of question where it makes sense that new material might be a correct answer?
Leave a Comment