01 / 20

Resolve the
Paradox

Master the skill of identifying apparent conflicts in passages and finding the explanation that reconciles both sides.

LSAT Logical Reasoning

What Is an Apparent Contradiction?

An apparent contradiction occurs when a passage presents two statements, facts, or pieces of evidence that seem to conflict with each other. The key word is apparent: on the LSAT, both statements are presented as true. Your job is not to decide which one is wrong, but to find the missing piece that makes both true simultaneously.

Why Resolving Contradictions Matters

High Frequency
These questions appear regularly in the Logical Reasoning section and test core analytical thinking.
Transferable Skill
Reconciling conflicting evidence is essential in law, science, and everyday decision-making.
Common Trap
Students often try to disprove one side rather than explain how both can be true: a costly mistake.

Anatomy of a Contradiction Question

Fact A "Sales increased by 40%" Fact B "Profits declined by 20%" ? Resolution "Costs rose due to expansion" Both Facts Are True ✓

The Core Rule

This means the resolution does not:

✕
Deny Fact A: "Sales didn't actually increase."
✕
Deny Fact B: "Profits didn't really decline."
✓
Bridge both: "Expansion costs absorbed the extra revenue, so profits fell despite higher sales."

Recognizing the Question Stem

Contradiction questions use distinctive language. Look for these signal phrases:

"Resolve"
"Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy?"
"Explain"
"Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the findings described above?"
"Reconcile"
"Which of the following, if true, would most help to reconcile the statements above?"

Resolve vs. Weaken vs. Strengthen

Resolve Weaken Strengthen
Goal Explain how both facts coexist Undermine the argument's conclusion Support the argument's conclusion
Accept facts? Both accepted Premises accepted, conclusion attacked Premises accepted, conclusion bolstered
Correct answer Bridges the gap Breaks the link Reinforces the link
Key trap Denying a fact Strengthening instead Being irrelevant

The 5-Step Method

1
Read the stem first. Confirm you're dealing with a "resolve / explain / reconcile" question.
2
Identify Fact A and Fact B. Paraphrase each in your own words. What seems to conflict?
3
Predict a bridge. Before looking at choices, ask: "What kind of information could make both true?"
4
Test each choice. For every option, ask: "If this is true, does the contradiction disappear?"
5
Eliminate denials. Any choice that negates Fact A or Fact B is automatically wrong.

Worked Example: The Puzzle

Fact A: Streetlights were installed to reduce crime.
Fact B: Reported crimes increased after installation.

Testing the Answer Choices

A
"The streetlights were poorly designed." : This suggests the lights failed. It denies Fact A's purpose rather than bridging the gap.
B
"Crime rates in surrounding areas also rose." : This is irrelevant to our specific contradiction.
C
"With better lighting, residents were more likely to notice and report criminal activity that previously went unobserved." ✓ Bridges both facts.
D
"The city also reduced police patrols." : This explains more crime, but doesn't connect it to the lights.

Worked Example: Higher Difficulty

Fact A: The new drug is more effective.
Fact B: Doctors prescribed it less than the competitor.

Resolving the Drug Paradox

A
"The competitor drug was approved a decade earlier and had an established safety record." : While this explains why doctors might still use the old drug, it doesn't resolve why they would avoid a significantly more effective new one. Choice B provides a direct reason to avoid it for many patients.
B
"The new drug carried severe side effects that made it unsuitable for patients with common comorbidities." ✓ Bridges both: effective but dangerous for many patients.
C
"The clinical trials used a small sample size." : This undermines Fact A rather than resolving the conflict.
D
"Cholesterol drugs are over-prescribed in general." : Irrelevant to the specific conflict between these two drugs.

Worked Example: Subtle Traps

Fact A: Population doubled.
Fact B: Habitat shrank by 30%.

This is trickier because students often assume population growth requires more habitat. But the correct answer must explain how fewer resources can coexist with more birds.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

✕ Denying a Fact
Choosing an answer that says one of the two facts is wrong or exaggerated. Both facts must remain true.
✕ Picking "Interesting but Irrelevant"
An answer may be true and related to the topic, but if it doesn't specifically connect Fact A to Fact B, it's wrong.
✕ Deepening the Paradox
Some wrong answers make the contradiction even more puzzling. The correct answer should make you think, "Oh, that explains it."

Strategy Summary

Step Action Key Question
1 Read the stem Is this a resolve/explain/reconcile question?
2 Identify both facts What two things seem to conflict?
3 Predict a bridge What type of info could explain both?
4 Test each choice Does the contradiction disappear?
5 Eliminate denials Does any choice negate a stated fact?

Question 1 of 5

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy described above?

Question 2 of 5

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the increase in speeding tickets?

Question 3 of 5

Which of the following, if true, most helps to reconcile the statements above?

Question 4 of 5

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the discrepancy between the projected and actual revenue increases?

Question 5 of 5

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the findings described above?