The author uses the word "immediacy" (line 39) most likely in order to express

Madeline on September 30 at 09:45PM

Missing Premise Drills

I am confused how to look at these drills and start to figure out an answer. What should I be looking for or connecting? How do I know my guess is correct? Is there a way to check? Thank you!

3 Replies

CAROLYN on October 7 at 04:22AM

This is also my question

CAROLYN on October 7 at 04:23AM

I do not see a lecture video in here for that

Skylar on October 20 at 01:51PM

@Crook Happy to help!

First, it may reassure you to know that many students struggle with approaching these drills at first. The more you practice and become familiar with them, the better you'll get at understanding the logic they're testing, and the easier they should be to complete.

These drills present 1-2 given premises, 1 missing premise, and 1 conclusion. You are tasked with coming up with the missing premise that will fill in the missing link and connect all of the pieces together. You should start by finding the contrapositives of all the given premises/conclusions, and then identify the two variables you must connect for the chain to be fully connected together and the conclusion to be properly drawn. The statement in which you connect these two variables and the contrapositive of this statement are your correct answers. You can check this by making sure that this statement can be combined with the other premises to result in the conclusion. The correct answer will also be listed for you on the back of the notecard.

There is no video lesson specifically for the drills because the drills are simplified variable-problems for the Sufficient and Necessary word-problems that are discussed in the video lesson. They allow you to practice the mechanisms and become familiar with the pieces of a valid argument without all of the language that can often overwhelm students at first. The more comfortable you become with these drills, the easier it should be to approach real Sufficient and Necessary problems on the LSAT.

Does this make sense? Please let us know if you have any other questions!