This free LSAT study guide teaches the skills the Law School Admission Test actually measures, organized to the current LSAC test format.[1] One thing to know up front: the LSAT removed the Analytical Reasoning (“Logic Games”) section after June 2024, so this guide does not teach Logic Games — it focuses on what is tested now.[3]
It’s interactive, not a wall of text: every module has built-in checkpoint quizzes, flashcards, and practice questions, so you learn by doing — not just reading.
The current LSAT scores you on three sections: two of and one of . We teach those in the first two modules and lead with Logical Reasoning, since it is about half of your scored questions. A third module covers the separate sample.
Read a module, test yourself at each checkpoint, then drill gaps with our free practice test and flashcards. This guide is a high-yield overview that maps the official format — not a full prep course.
LSAT Exam Snapshot
- 1
Logical Reasoning (scored)
~24–26 questions, 35 minutes. Read a short argument, answer one question about it.
- 2
Logical Reasoning (scored)
A second scored LR section — together the two make up about half of your scored questions.
- 3
Reading Comprehension (scored)
4 passages (one is a comparative pair), ~27 questions, 35 minutes.
- 4
Unscored variable section
One extra 35-minute section (LR or RC) that pretests future questions. It looks identical to a scored section — you can't tell which one it is, so give every section full effort.
| Detail | Current LSAT |
|---|---|
| Sections | 4 × 35 min: two scored Logical Reasoning, one scored Reading Comprehension, one unscored variable |
| Logic Games | Removed after June 2024 — no longer tested |
| Total scored questions | ≈ 75–77 (LSAC publishes no exact count) |
| Format | Multiple choice, digital |
| Time | ≈ 140 min testing + a 10-min break |
| Score scale | 120–180 (median ≈ 153); no penalty for wrong answers |
| LSAT Writing | Separate, unscored, online — 50 min (15 prewrite + 35 essay); required on file |
| Administered by | LSAC (in-person at Prometric centers from Aug 2026; remote via LawHub through June 2026) |
| Cost | ≈ $253 (2026–2027; includes Writing) — verify current fee on lsac.org |
| Retakes | 5× per current reportable period; 7× lifetime |
The scored test is dominated by Logical Reasoning: two of the three scored sections are LR, so it is roughly half of your scored questions. Reading Comprehension is the other scored section. Study by weight — master LR first.[1]
120
Floor — lowest score
~153
Median (~50th %ile)
~160
≈ 80th %ile
~170
≈ 97th %ile
180
Perfect score
Module 1 · Logical Reasoning
Two scored sections — about half of your LSAT score. Each Logical Reasoning question gives you a short argument and asks one question about it.[4]
The whole section rewards a single skill set: find the conclusion, see the gap between the evidence and that conclusion, and reason validly with conditional statements. Master this module and you move the biggest lever on the test.
1.1 The Argument: Premise, Conclusion, Assumption
Every LR stimulus is built from (the evidence) and a (the main point). Your first job, every time, is to separate them.
Conclusion indicators — therefore, thus, hence, so, clearly — point to the main point; premise indicators — because, since, for, given that — point to support. When there’s no indicator, apply the “Therefore Test”: the claim that fits naturally after “therefore” is the conclusion.
Between the premises and the conclusion sits the — an unstated premise the argument needs to work. Most LR questions hinge on this gap, so train yourself to ask: what does the author take for granted to get from the evidence to the point? Watch for an , too — a claim that is supported by a premise and then used to support the main conclusion.
Premises
The supporting evidence — the reasons given. Treat them as true.
Assumption
An unstated premise the argument needs to work — the gap between evidence and conclusion.
Conclusion
The main point the author is trying to prove. Find it first — ask 'what is this trying to convince me of?'
| Role | Signal words | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| Conclusion | therefore, thus, hence, so, clearly, it follows that | States the main point being argued |
| Premise | because, since, for, given that, after all | Offers evidence/support for the conclusion |
| Counterpoint | some argue, critics claim, it might seem | A view the author sets up to argue against |
1.2 The Assumption Family of Questions
The largest cluster of LR questions attacks the gap between evidence and conclusion. They share a method: find the assumption, then strengthen it, break it, or describe the error.
A is something the argument requires; the gold-standard tool is the — negate a choice, and if the argument falls apart, that choice was necessary. A is one that, added in, would guarantee the conclusion.
Strengthen and Weaken questions ask you to add a fact that makes the conclusion more or less likely — for causal arguments, the most powerful weakener is usually an alternative cause. A question asks you to name the reasoning error in the abstract, and an Evaluate question asks what information would best help you judge the argument.[4]
| Question type | What it asks | Your move |
|---|---|---|
| Necessary Assumption | What must the argument assume? | Negate the answer; if the argument breaks, it's necessary |
| Sufficient Assumption | What would guarantee the conclusion? | Bridge a new conclusion term to a premise term |
| Strengthen | What makes the conclusion more likely? | Add support; rule out an alternative explanation |
| Weaken | What makes the conclusion less likely? | Attack the link; raise an alternative cause or counterexample |
| Flaw | What error does the reasoning commit? | Name the flaw type in the abstract |
| Evaluate | What info would help judge it? | Find a question whose answers strengthen vs. weaken |
1.3 The Inference Family of Questions
The second cluster treats the stimulus as given and asks you to work with it. An (Must Be True) question asks what is guaranteed by the statements — combine them and pick the answer that is fully provable, never one that goes even slightly beyond the text. A Main Point question asks for the .
A question asks how the argument proceeds (by analogy, by counterexample), and a question asks which answer shares the same logical structure — match the form, ignore the topic. A question (two speakers) asks what they disagree about, and a Role question asks what job a highlighted sentence does.[4]
| Question type | What it asks | Your move |
|---|---|---|
| Must Be True / Inference | What is guaranteed by the statements? | Combine them; pick the fully provable answer |
| Most Strongly Supported | What do the statements best support? | Pick the most provable, least extreme choice |
| Main Point | What is the main conclusion? | Find what the rest is offered to prove |
| Method of Reasoning | How does the argument proceed? | Describe the structure, not the content |
| Parallel Reasoning | Which answer matches the structure? | Match conclusion type, validity, and form |
| Point at Issue | What do the speakers disagree on? | One affirms, the other denies, both addressed it |
| Role of a Statement | What does this sentence do? | Premise, conclusion, sub-conclusion, or opposing view |
1.4 Conditional & Formal Logic
Conditional logic is the engine under both LR clusters. A statement “If A then B” means A is the (enough to guarantee B) and B is the (required for A).
The only other valid statement you can draw is the : negate both terms and flip them (“If not B then not A”). The two tempting reversals — concluding “not A → not B” () or “B → A” () — are invalid, and they are among the most common wrong answers on the test.
Valid
If A → B
A (sufficient) guarantees B (necessary). “If it’s a dog, then it’s a mammal.”
Valid · Contrapositive
If not B → not A
Negate and flip. “If it’s not a mammal, it’s not a dog.” Always true when A → B is true.
Invalid · Denying the antecedent
If not A → not B
“Not a dog, so not a mammal” — wrong. A cat is a mammal too.
Invalid · Affirming the consequent
If B → A
“It’s a mammal, so it’s a dog” — wrong. The arrow only runs one way.
Learn to translate trigger words into arrows. If, when, all, every, any introduce the sufficient condition; only, only if, requires, must, necessary introduce the necessary condition; and unless / without / exceptmean “if not” (the term after them becomes the necessary condition). Then handle : some means at least one and reverses; mostmeans more than half and does not reverse — but two “most” statements about the same group combine to a guaranteed “some” overlap.
| Phrase | Diagram | Why |
|---|---|---|
| If A, then B | A → B | A is sufficient; B is necessary |
| A only if B | A → B | 'Only if' marks the necessary condition (B) |
| Only A are B | B → A | 'Only' flags A as necessary for B |
| No A are B | A → not B | Also gives B → not A by contrapositive |
| A unless B | not B → A | 'Unless' = 'if not'; B is the necessary condition |
| All A are B | A → B | Universal statement is a conditional |
1.5 Common Reasoning Flaws
LSAC says you do not need to memorize fancy fallacy names — you only need to recognize faulty reasoning.[10] Still, learning the recurring patterns makes Flaw, Weaken, and Parallel-Flaw questions fast, because the wrong reasoning repeats.
The single most-tested error is the : concluding A causes B just because they appear together. Close behind are confusing a with a , the , , , the , and unrepresentative .
| Flaw | What goes wrong | Tell-tale sign |
|---|---|---|
| Correlation ≠ causation | Assumes A caused B from co-occurrence | Ignores other causes or reverse causation |
| Necessary/sufficient confusion | Treats a required condition as enough (or vice versa) | Conditional reasoning in the wrong direction |
| Straw man | Distorts a position, then refutes the weak version | 'So you're saying we should do nothing…' |
| Circular reasoning | Assumes the conclusion as a premise | The reason restates the conclusion |
| Equivocation | Uses one word in two senses | A key term shifts meaning mid-argument |
| Unrepresentative sample | Generalizes from a biased/small sample | Conclusion about a whole from a slice |
| False dichotomy | Offers two options as if they're the only ones | 'Either we cut costs or we fail' |
| Part-to-whole / whole-to-part | What's true of parts must be true of the whole (or reverse) | Composition / division |
Checkpoint · Logical Reasoning
Question 1 of 10
If all poets are dreamers, and some dreamers are musicians, which of the following must be true?
Module 2 · Reading Comprehension
One scored section — four passage sets, ~27 questions. Reading Comprehension gives you four sets, each a single passage or a comparative pair, drawn from the humanities, the social sciences, the natural sciences, and the law.[5] The passages are dense and argument-rich, but no outside knowledge is required — every answer is in the text.
2.1 Active Reading & Passage Structure
The mistake most test-takers make is reading for detail. Instead, read for structure: the author’s , their opinion, and the role each paragraph plays.
Track the , every viewpoint and who holds it, and the (usually measured — cautious approval, mild skepticism — rarely extreme). Flag pivot words (however, but, although, yet) where the argument turns; questions cluster there.
- 1
Read for structure, not detail
On the first read, track the author's purpose, opinion, and the role of each paragraph — not every fact.
- 2
Map the passage
Note where the main point, viewpoints, and shifts ('however,' 'but') live so you can return to them.
- 3
Nail the main point & tone
In one sentence: what is the author arguing, and how do they feel about it? Most questions hinge on this.
- 4
Answer from the text
Prove each answer with a line in the passage. Eliminate choices that are too strong, off-topic, or unsupported.
Before you touch the answers, state the passage’s thesis in one sentence. Then prove every choice with a line in the text. The four trap families are constant: the (new information), the (stronger than the text), the half-right answer (one clause wrong), and the reversal (the opposite of what was said, often by swapping two viewpoints).
| Trap | How to catch it |
|---|---|
| Out of scope | Mentions something the passage never discussed → eliminate |
| Too extreme | Uses 'all/never/only/must' beyond the text's strength → eliminate |
| Half right | One clause is correct, another is wrong → fully wrong |
| Reversal | States the opposite, or attributes a view to the wrong person → verify direction |
2.2 Comparative Reading (Passage A & B)
One of the four RC sets is : two shorter related passages instead of one. The questions concern the relationship between them — generalization/instance, principle/application, or point/counterpoint.[5] Keep the two authors in separate mental columns: each one’s main point and tone, what they agree on, what they disagree on, and how their scopes differ.
| Track this | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Each author's main point | Most questions ask about one author's view or how they relate |
| Points of agreement | A frequent question: 'both passages would agree that…' |
| Points of disagreement | The credited answer often turns on a real difference |
| How B relates to A | Does B support, qualify, rebut, or stay independent of A? |
| Difference in scope/tone | One may be broad/cautious, the other narrow/assertive |
2.3 RC Question Types & Answer Strategy
RC questions reward the same provability discipline as LR. The main types: main idea / primary purpose (covers the whole passage), explicit detail (stated in the text), inference (provable, not just plausible), function / role (why a word, sentence, or paragraph is there), organization (how the passage is built), and application / analogy (apply a passage idea to a new case).[5]
| Type | What it asks | Your move |
|---|---|---|
| Main idea / Primary purpose | The central claim or why it was written | Answer must cover the whole passage + stance |
| Explicit detail | What the passage directly states | Locate the line; match the paraphrase |
| Inference | What the passage implies/supports | Must be provable from the text, not extreme |
| Function / Role | Why a word, line, or paragraph is included | Describe its job in the argument |
| Organization | How the passage is structured | Summarize each paragraph's role |
| Application / Analogy | Apply an idea to a new situation | Match the underlying relationship, not the topic |
Checkpoint · Reading Comprehension
Question 1 of 10
In a passage discussing the evolution of constitutional law, what would most likely represent a primary source?
Module 3 · LSAT Argumentative Writing
Separate, unscored, but required. The writing sample is no longer part of the multiple-choice test — it’s taken online, on demand, through LSAC’s LawHub, and it does not affect your 120–180 score. But your score cannot be released to schools until a completed sample is on file, so it is not optional.[7]
3.1 The Writing Task & a Winning Approach
In , you’re given a debatable issue with a few perspectives, and you must build and defend a position. You get 50 minutes total: 15 minutes of structured prewriting analysis, then 35 minutes to write.[2] There is no “right” side — you’re graded by schools on the quality of your argument: a clear thesis, organized reasoning, and consideration of the other side.
| Phase | Time | Do this |
|---|---|---|
| Prewriting analysis | ≈ 15 min | Read the issue and perspectives; pick the side you can best support |
| Plan | first ~5 of the 35 | Draft a thesis and 2–3 reasons; note the strongest counterpoint |
| Write | ≈ 25 min | Intro with a clear position → body paragraphs with reasons + evidence → address the other side |
| Proofread | last ~5 min | Fix grammar, transitions, and clarity |
Checkpoint · LSAT Argumentative Writing
Question 1 of 6
If all poets are dreamers, and some dreamers are musicians, which of the following must be true?
How to Use This LSAT Study Guide
This guide is built to be worked, not just read. The most efficient path to your target score:
- Lead with Logical Reasoning. Two of the three scored sections are LR — about half your score. Master the argument parts, the question types, and conditional logic first.
- Check off as you go. Use the Study Guide Contents to mark each section done; it raises your exam-readiness score.
- Take every checkpoint. The end-of-module quizzes show you exactly which skills need another pass.
- Drill the weak skill. Send your weak area into the flashcards and a practice test until the score climbs.
- Use blind review. After a timed set, redo the questions you missed untimed before checking answers — it builds the reasoning skill faster than reading explanations.
LSAT Concept Questions
Common LSAT reasoning concepts candidates search while studying — each answered briefly and anchored to an official LSAC source. Test yourself, then drill them as flashcards.
LSAT Glossary
The high-yield LSAT terms in one place — hover any dotted term in the guide, or flip the whole deck here as a self-grading flashcard set.
- Affirming the consequent
- The invalid move of concluding 'If B then A' from 'If A then B.'
- Analytical Reasoning (Logic Games)
- The former 'Logic Games' section, removed from the LSAT after June 2024. It is no longer tested — the current LSAT replaced it with a second Logical Reasoning section.
- Assumption
- An unstated premise an argument depends on — the bridge between the stated evidence and the conclusion.
- Author's tone
- How the author feels about the subject, revealed by word choice; LSAT tones are usually measured, not extreme.
- Circular reasoning
- Assuming the conclusion as a premise — the argument proves a claim by relying on that very claim.
- Comparative reading
- An RC set of two related shorter passages; questions concern the relationship between them (e.g., agreement, point/counterpoint).
- Conclusion
- The main claim an argument is trying to establish; every premise is offered to support it.
- Contrapositive
- From 'If A then B,' the valid 'If not B then not A' — negate both terms and flip them. Always true when the original is.
- Correlation–causation flaw
- Concluding A causes B merely because they occur together, ignoring coincidence, reverse causation, or a third cause.
- Counterexample
- A specific case that shows a general claim or conclusion is false — a powerful way to weaken.
- Denying the antecedent
- The invalid move of concluding 'If not A then not B' from 'If A then B.'
- Equivocation
- Using one word in two different senses within the same argument, creating a false appearance of validity.
- Extreme-language trap
- A choice using 'all, never, only, must' stronger than the text supports — usually wrong unless the text was equally absolute.
- False dichotomy
- Presenting only two options as if they were the only possibilities when others exist.
- Flaw
- An error in how an argument reasons from evidence to conclusion (e.g., mistaking correlation for causation). Identifying flaws is an official LSAT ability.
- Inference
- A statement that must be (or is strongly supported as) true given other statements. The LSAT rewards small, well-supported inferences.
- Intermediate conclusion
- A claim supported by a premise and itself used to support the main conclusion — both a conclusion and a premise.
- Logical Reasoning
- An LSAT section in which you read a short argument and answer one question about it. There are two scored Logical Reasoning sections — about half of your scored questions.
- LSAT Argumentative Writing
- A separate, unscored, 50-minute online writing sample in which you defend a position on a debatable issue; required on file for your score to be released.
- Main conclusion
- The single claim the whole argument is built to prove, distinct from any intermediate (sub) conclusion.
- Main point (passage)
- The central idea of a whole RC passage — the author's overall claim and stance, not a single detail.
- Method of reasoning
- How an argument proceeds (e.g., by analogy, by counterexample) — describe the structure, not the content.
- Necessary assumption
- An assumption the argument requires to be true. Test it with the Negation Test: if negating it destroys the argument, it is necessary.
- Necessary condition
- A condition required for a result; without it the result cannot occur. In 'If A then B,' B is necessary for A.
- Negation Test
- A technique for Necessary Assumption questions: negate each answer choice; the one whose negation breaks the argument is the necessary assumption.
- Out-of-scope answer
- A choice that introduces information the argument or passage never addressed — a wrong answer even if plausible.
- Paradox
- A pair of facts that seem to conflict; a resolve question asks for the fact that lets both be true at once.
- Parallel reasoning
- A question asking which answer shares the same logical structure as the stimulus, regardless of topic.
- Percentile
- The share of test-takers you scored above; e.g., about 153 is the median (50th percentile).
- Point at issue
- The specific claim two speakers disagree about — one would affirm it, the other deny it, and both addressed it.
- Premise
- A statement offered as evidence or support for a conclusion. On the LSAT you accept premises as true even if you'd dispute them in real life.
- Primary purpose
- Why the author wrote a passage (to argue, explain, critique, compare) — best stated with a verb.
- Principle
- A broad rule the LSAT asks you to either identify from a case or apply to a new one.
- Quantifier
- A word of amount — all, most, some, none — that the LSAT tests for valid combinations (e.g., two 'most' statements yield a 'some' overlap).
- Raw score
- The number of questions you answered correctly, before conversion to the 120–180 scale.
- Reading Comprehension
- An LSAT section of four passage sets (one is a comparative pair) followed by 5–8 questions each, testing how well you understand dense, argument-rich text.
- Scaled score
- Your 120–180 LSAT score, converted from your raw score (number correct) and equated across test forms.
- Scope
- The range of what an argument covers. A scope shift — concluding about something narrower or broader than the evidence — is a frequent flaw.
- Straw man
- Distorting an opponent's position into a weaker version, then attacking that weaker version.
- Sufficient assumption
- An assumption that, if added to the premises, would be enough to guarantee the conclusion.
- Sufficient condition
- A condition that, if met, guarantees a result. In 'If A then B,' A is sufficient for B.
- Variable section
- The unscored fourth section (either Logical Reasoning or Reading Comprehension) that pretests future questions. It looks identical to a scored section, so give every section full effort.
LSAT Study Guide FAQ
No. LSAC removed the Analytical Reasoning section — commonly called 'Logic Games' — after the June 2024 test. The current LSAT has no Logic Games. In its place, the test now has two scored Logical Reasoning sections plus one scored Reading Comprehension section.
Four 35-minute multiple-choice sections: two scored Logical Reasoning sections, one scored Reading Comprehension section, and one unscored 'variable' section (LR or RC) that pretests future questions. A separate, unscored LSAT Argumentative Writing sample is taken online on its own.
Your raw score — the number of questions you answer correctly — is converted to a scaled score from 120 to 180. All questions are weighted equally and there is no penalty for wrong answers, so you should answer every question. The median score is about 153.
The four sections are 35 minutes each (about 140 minutes of testing) with a 10-minute break after the second section. Reading Comprehension has four passage sets of 5–8 questions each (~27 total). Each Logical Reasoning section has roughly 24–26 questions, so the scored portion is about 75–77 questions.
Lead with Logical Reasoning — two of the three scored sections are LR, so it's about half your score. Learn the argument parts, the question types, and conditional logic first, then Reading Comprehension strategy, then the Writing task. Read each module, take the checkpoint, and drill gaps with our free practice test and flashcards.
LSAT Argumentative Writing is a separate, unscored, online section. You're given a debatable issue with different perspectives and must build and defend a position in 50 minutes (15 minutes of prewriting plus 35 minutes of writing). It must be on file for your score to be released to schools.
The LSAT registration fee is about $253 for the 2026–2027 testing year, and it includes LSAT Argumentative Writing (verify the current fee on lsac.org). You can take the LSAT up to five times within the current reportable score period and seven times over your lifetime.
The LSAT is fully digital. Through June 2026 it was delivered remotely via LSAC's LawHub with live proctoring; starting with the August 2026 administration, LSAC is moving to in-person testing at Prometric centers, with remote testing allowed only by accommodation or for candidates far from a center.
Yes — this study guide, the checkpoints, the glossary, the practice test, and the flashcards are 100% free with no account required.
References
- 1.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “What's in the LSAT (LawHub).” lawhub.org. ↑
- 2.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “Specifications for the LSAT and LSAT Argumentative Writing.” lsac.org. ↑
- 3.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “What to Expect Starting With the August 2024 LSAT.” lsac.org. ↑
- 4.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “LSAT Test Format: Logical Reasoning.” lsac.org. ↑
- 5.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “Reading Comprehension Question Types.” lsac.org. ↑
- 6.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “LSAT Scoring.” lsac.org. ↑
- 7.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “LSAT Argumentative Writing.” lsac.org. ↑
- 8.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “LSAT & CAS Fees.” lsac.org. ↑
- 9.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “Limits on Repeating the LSAT.” lsac.org. ↑
- 10.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “Frequently Asked Questions About the LSAT.” lsac.org. ↑
- 11.Law School Admission Council (LSAC). “Registration Open for the 2026–2027 LSAT Cycle (return to in-person testing).” lsac.org. ↑
Career Employer
Career Employer is the ultimate resource to help you get started working the job of your dreams. We cover topics from general career information, career searching, exam preparation with free study materials, career interviewing, and becoming successful in your career of choice.
All PostsCareer Employer’s Editorial Process
Here at Career Employer, we focus a lot on providing factually accurate information that is always up to date. We strive to provide correct information using strict editorial processes, article editing, and fact-checking for all of the information found on our website. We only utilize trustworthy and relevant resources. To find out more, make sure to read our full editorial process page here.