What this deck covers
This deck focuses on Apply The Principle, giving you a quick way to review the definitions, rules, and examples that matter most for LSAT Reading.
Study Apply The Principle in LSAT Reading with focused flashcards that help you recognize the idea, recall the key rule, and apply it in practice-style prompts.
0% Complete
What is the primary task in an Apply-the-Principle question in LSAT Reading Comprehension?
Tap card or press Space to flip
Select the option that best follows the passage's stated general rule. The answer must match the passage's rule, not just any detail.
How well did you know it?
Card 1 / 37
Space to flip · ← / → to move · once flipped, → Got it · ← Still learning
This deck focuses on Apply The Principle, giving you a quick way to review the definitions, rules, and examples that matter most for LSAT Reading.
Work through these flashcards in short sessions. Try to answer each prompt before flipping the card, then revisit any cards you miss until the explanation feels automatic.
Answer: Select the option that best follows the passage's stated general rule. The answer must match the passage's rule, not just any detail.
Answer: The exception does not apply. No condition met means no exception granted.
Answer: Apply an abstract rule to a new fact pattern to reach the best match. Match abstract rules from the passage to new scenarios in answer choices.
Answer: Apply the exception first; it can override the general rule. Exceptions limit the rule's scope and take precedence when applicable.
Answer: Check each prong; the correct choice satisfies all required elements. Multi-part principles require satisfying every component, not just some.
Answer: If the triggering condition occurs, the outcome must follow. Sufficient conditions work forwards: trigger → outcome.
Answer: It violates the rule by affirming validity despite restricting speech. Can't be valid if it restricts speech (violates presumptive invalidity).
Answer: Policy P is justified. Sufficient condition met (reduces emissions), so conclusion follows.
Answer: Work W is not authentic. "No X are Y" means if X, then not Y; coercion → not authentic.
Answer: Choose the closest match that preserves the rule's key constraints. When all choices are imperfect, pick the one violating fewest conditions.
Answer: The evidence must be excluded. Illegal obtaining triggers mandatory exclusion per the rule.
Answer: It must unify them by stating the rule that explains the author's treatment. The principle must explain why the author treats examples similarly.
Answer: Claim C is likely reliable, but not guaranteed reliable. "Most" creates probability, not certainty.
Answer: Statement H is admissible. The exception makes inadmissible hearsay admissible.
Answer: Affirming the consequent (reversing sufficient and necessary conditions). Can't reverse "all A are B" to conclude "all B are A."
Answer: A choice that matches topic or keywords but violates a key condition. Attractive distractors often miss a crucial requirement of the principle.
Answer: A conditional or normative generalization (rule) stated broadly, not a detail. Principles are broad rules, not specific facts or examples.
Answer: Principle: use a rule on new facts; inference: derive from given text only. Principles extend to new scenarios; inferences stay within the text.
Answer: No valid inference that Species X is invasive. Affirming the consequent fallacy; disruption doesn't prove invasiveness.
Answer: No liability follows due to the unforeseeability exception. The exception (unforeseeable harm) overrides the general liability rule.
Answer: You cannot conclude C; the sufficient condition (A and B) is unmet. Both conditions needed; missing B prevents conclusion C.
Answer: As a short rule with clear conditions and a clear outcome. Simplify complex principles into if-then format for easier application.
Answer: The governing principle stated or implied in the passage. Look for the rule or standard that controls the situation described.
Answer: Inconsistent; penalties should not apply to Disclosure D. Contradicts the rule; voluntary disclosure should avoid penalties.
Answer: Restate the principle as a short if–then rule in your own words. Converting to if-then format clarifies the rule's logic.
Answer: Study S's results must be disclosed. Public funding triggers the sufficient condition for disclosure.
Answer: The right to play loud music may be limited due to direct harm to others. Loud music directly harms neighbors' sleep, triggering the limitation.
Answer: Conditional or normative cues such as "if," "only if," "must," "should.". These words signal rules with specific triggers and outcomes.
Answer: Policy P should be revised. Unfair triggers the sufficient condition, requiring revision.
Answer: Eliminate it; Apply-the-Principle is driven by the rule, not surface overlap. Matching details without matching the rule is a trap answer.
Answer: Action A is lawful. Contrapositive: permitted → lawful (necessary condition satisfied).
Answer: If the outcome occurs, the required condition must be present. Necessary conditions work backwards: outcome → requirement.
Answer: It does not match; it contradicts the "only if" condition. Violates necessary condition: fair requires merit-based criteria.
Answer: Study S was replicated. "Only if replicated" means reliable → replicated, so S was replicated.
Answer: Track direction: sufficient triggers; necessary is required for the outcome. Sufficient conditions guarantee outcomes; necessary conditions must be present.
Answer: The choice whose facts satisfy the rule's conditions and produce its result. Correct answers fulfill all conditions and lead to the stated outcome.
Answer: Contract C is unenforceable. Lacking consideration triggers the rule making it unenforceable.