1. LR overview 

2. Causation and correlation

3. Developing the Lawyer Mind - Understanding words, logical terms, and quantifiers, and be careful of assumptions

4. Argumentation - argument structure, Dissecting arguments

5. Practice dissecting - have some, need more

Understanding words, logical terms, and quantifiers, and be careful of assumptions

1. Role in Argument

2. Method of argument

3. Main point

4. Point at issue

5. Necessary Assumptions

6. Sufficient assumptions

7. Flaws

8. Strengthen

9. Weaken

Inference questions test your ability to determine what logically follows from given information. Unlike argumentation questions that ask you to evaluate what someone else has argued, inference questions test whether a conclusion could be supported by the information given. This skill is absolutely fundamental to legal reasoning—you'll constantly need to determine what can be concluded from contracts, statutes, case law, and evidence, while being clear about what CANNOT be concluded.

What Are Inference Questions?

Inference questions ask you to draw valid conclusions from provided information. They present a set of facts or premises and ask you to determine what must be true, what's most likely true, or what cannot be true based on that information.

These questions typically appear with stems like:

• "Which one of the following must be true?"

• "The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following?"

• "Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?"

• "If the information above is true, which one of the following cannot be true?"

• "The author would be most likely to agree with which one of the following?"

Notice that these stems focus on what logically follows from the given information, not on evaluating someone else's argument or conclusion.

Why Inference Questions Matter

Inference questions test a fundamental skill in legal reasoning: the ability to extract valid conclusions from available information while avoiding unwarranted assumptions. As a lawyer, you'll constantly make inferences from:

• Contract language to determine party obligations

• Statutory text to understand legal requirements

• Case precedents to predict outcomes

• Evidence to build legal arguments

The LSAT focuses heavily on these questions because:

• Making valid inferences is central to legal analysis

• These questions test precise logical thinking

• The ability to distinguish warranted from unwarranted conclusions is crucial

• Many law school exam questions involve drawing inferences from legal texts

Moreover, inference skills appear across multiple question types and are essential for success in Reading Comprehension as well as Logical Reasoning.

Types of Reasoning That Create Inferences

Deductive Reasoning provides the strongest inferences because it guarantees certainty. If the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. This is used in "Must Be True" and "Cannot Be True" questions.

Example: "All contracts require consideration. This agreement is a contract. Therefore, this agreement requires consideration."

Inductive Reasoning creates inferences based on patterns, trends, or observations. These inferences are probable rather than certain. This is used in "Most Strongly Supported" questions.

Example: "Every Supreme Court justice in the past fifty years has had a law degree. Therefore, the next Supreme Court justice will likely have a law degree."

Abductive Reasoning involves inference to the best explanation. When faced with observations, it selects the most plausible explanation among alternatives.

Example: "The defendant's fingerprints are on the weapon, had motive, and no alibi. Therefore, the defendant is likely guilty."

Common Question Types

Must Be True/Cannot Be True: Require 100% certainty based on deductive reasoning. The answer must be guaranteed (or impossible) given the premises.

Most Strongly Supported: Allow for probability based on inductive reasoning. The answer should be the most likely conclusion, even if not guaranteed.

Author's Perspective: Ask you to infer what the author would think about related issues based on their stated views.

How to Approach Inference Questions

Step 1: Understand the Information

• Identify what facts are stated directly

• Note relationships between pieces of information

• Recognize scope and limitations

Step 2: Look for Connections

• Find shared terms or concepts between statements

• Identify conditional relationships ("if-then" statements)

• Note quantitative relationships (most, some, all)

Step 3: Consider What Must Follow

• Determine what's guaranteed by the information

• Identify what becomes impossible

• Assess what's made more or less likely

Step 4: Match to Question Type

• For "must be true": stick to guaranteed conclusions

• For "most strongly supported": look for most probable conclusions

• For "cannot be true": find what's impossible

Common Traps in Inference Questions

The Leap of Logic: Going beyond what the information actually supports.

Bringing in Outside Knowledge: Using information not provided in the stimulus.

Confusing Possibility with Probability: Mismatching certainty levels required by different question types.

Ignoring Scope and Limitations: Overgeneralizing beyond the boundaries of the given information.

Reversing Conditional Relationships: Incorrectly assuming that if "A implies B," then "B implies A."

Extreme Language Errors: Making absolute claims unsupported by moderate evidence.

Temporal Confusion: Assuming causation from mere sequence of events.

Composition/Division Fallacy: Incorrectly transferring characteristics between groups and individuals.

Example Question

Most students who study abroad improve their language skills. Jennifer studied abroad last semester.

Which one of the following can be properly inferred?

A) Jennifer improved her language skills. B) Jennifer probably improved her language skills. C) If Jennifer improved her language skills, she studied abroad. D) Students who don't study abroad cannot improve their language skills. E) Jennifer studied abroad because she wanted to improve her language skills.

Analysis: The correct answer is B) Jennifer probably improved her language skills.

The premise tells us "most" students who study abroad improve their skills, and Jennifer studied abroad. This makes it probable (but not certain) that she improved her skills. Answer A is too strong ("can be properly inferred" suggests certainty), while C reverses the conditional relationship, D makes an unsupported absolute claim, and E introduces causation not supported by the premises.

Tips for Success

• Study conditional logic: Many inference questions involve "if-then" relationships

• Practice with different question types: Each type requires different levels of certainty

• Focus on process over answers: Analyze your reasoning, not just whether you got it right

• Read carefully and slowly: Precision in understanding leads to precision in inference

• Stay within the stimulus: Base conclusions only on provided information

• Use scratch paper: Diagram complex relationships when helpful

Conclusion

Understanding inferences is foundational to legal reasoning and LSAT success. The ability to make precise, warranted inferences while avoiding unwarranted assumptions separates strong legal thinkers from weak ones. These skills directly translate to contract interpretation, statutory construction, case analysis, and evidence evaluation—core competencies you'll use throughout your legal career.

Master inference questions, and you'll have built analytical skills that serve you well beyond the LSAT.