COMPREHENSIVE LSAT EXAM
COMPLETE WITH ANSWER KEYS AND
RATIONALES
Content: Logical Reasoning, Reading Comprehension, and Analytical Reasoning (Logic
Games)
LSAT PRACTICE EXAM
Instructions: This exam consists of 4 sections. You have approximately 35 minutes per
section (timing is self-administered for this practice set). Select the best answer for each
question.
Section I: Logical Reasoning (Questions 1–38)
Each question is followed by a short argument or set of facts. Choose the answer that most
logically completes or addresses the argument.
1. Economist: In the past decade, the country of Belgravia has seen a 20% increase in the
number of university graduates. However, the average starting salary for these
graduates has decreased by 10% after adjusting for inflation. Therefore, the increased
supply of graduates must be driving down wages.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the economist’s argument?
(A) The number of jobs requiring a university degree increased by 25% over the same
, period.
(B) The cost of attending university in Belgravia has risen faster than inflation.
(C) Many of the new graduates are entering fields that have historically had low starting
salaries.
(D) The population of Belgravia grew by 5% during the past decade.
(E) A recession occurred in Belgravia during the last two years, causing widespread wage
stagnation across all sectors.
Answer: (E) The economist assumes the wage drop is due to increased supply. (E) provides
an alternative cause (recession) that would explain lower wages regardless of supply. (A)
would actually strengthen the idea that supply outpaced demand if jobs increased less
than graduates, but it does not address the causal link.
2. Politician: Some people argue that we should not fund the space program because
there are problems on Earth like poverty. But this is a false choice. We can solve Earth’s
problems while also exploring space. Funding for space exploration constitutes less than
0.5% of the federal budget, a tiny fraction compared to social welfare programs.
The politician’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism for:
(A) Ignoring the possibility that the 0.5% could be used to fund other important
initiatives.
(B) Assuming that because a quantity is small in percentage terms, it is not significant in
absolute terms.
(C) Using evidence that is based on an outdated budgetary estimate.
(D) Relying on an analogy that is not strictly parallel.
(E) Failing to address the argument that space exploration is inherently dangerous.
Answer: (B) The politician counters the objection by noting the budget is a small
percentage. The flaw is assuming small percentage equals insignificance or that the funds
could not be effectively used elsewhere. (B) captures this.
3. If the city builds a new stadium, then property taxes will increase. If property taxes
increase, many residents will move to the suburbs. If many residents move to the
, suburbs, local businesses will suffer. Therefore, if the city builds a new stadium, local
businesses will suffer.
The reasoning in the argument is:
(A) Circular
(B) A causal oversimplification
(C) A valid chain of conditional logic
(D) An ad hominem attack
(E) A false dilemma
Answer: (C) The argument uses conditional statements: Stadium → Tax Increase → Move
→ Business Suffer. If the premises are true, the conclusion logically follows. This is a valid
hypothetical syllogism.
4. Museum director: We should acquire the Harrison painting. It is a masterpiece of early
20th-century art, and it would be a major draw for visitors.
Curator: But the Harrison painting is currently on loan to a museum across the country.
We cannot acquire it until the loan period ends.
The curator responds to the director by:
(A) Pointing out a factual impediment to the director’s proposal.
(B) Questioning the director’s assessment of the painting’s quality.
(C) Suggesting an alternative acquisition.
(D) Arguing that the director has a conflict of interest.
(E) Dismissing the director’s argument as irrelevant.
Answer: (A) The curator does not dispute the painting’s value; they point out a practical
obstacle (the loan) preventing immediate acquisition.
5. Biologist: The new species of frog discovered in the Amazon has a unique toxin. In lab
tests, this toxin kills antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Therefore, this toxin could be
developed into a drug to treat infections that currently have no cure.
The biologist’s argument assumes that:
(A) The toxin is not harmful to human cells.
, (B) Antibiotic-resistant bacteria are the only cause of untreatable infections.
(C) The frog population is large enough to sustain harvesting for drug development.
(D) The toxin will remain effective when administered to humans as it was in the lab.
(E) There are no other natural toxins that kill antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
Answer: (D) The argument leaps from lab efficacy to human treatment. It assumes that
what works in a petri dish will work in a complex human body without losing efficacy or
causing toxicity.
Questions 6–7 refer to the following passage.
In a study, participants who drank green tea daily for three months reported lower stress
levels than those who drank a placebo. The researchers concluded that green tea
reduces stress. However, the participants in the green tea group were also required to
attend weekly meditation sessions, while the placebo group did not.
6. Which of the following describes the flaw in the researchers’ reasoning?
(A) Correlation is mistaken for causation.
(B) A confounding variable was not controlled for.
(C) The sample size was too small to draw a conclusion.
(D) The placebo effect was ignored.
(E) The study used self-reported data, which is unreliable.
Answer: (B) The meditation sessions are a confounding variable. It is unclear whether the
stress reduction came from the tea or the meditation.
7. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion that green tea
itself reduces stress?
(A) Another study found that meditation alone reduces stress.
(B) The participants in the green tea group reported drinking an average of 4 cups per
day.
(C) A follow-up study gave both groups meditation sessions and green tea, and both
groups showed equal stress reduction.
COMPLETE WITH ANSWER KEYS AND
RATIONALES
Content: Logical Reasoning, Reading Comprehension, and Analytical Reasoning (Logic
Games)
LSAT PRACTICE EXAM
Instructions: This exam consists of 4 sections. You have approximately 35 minutes per
section (timing is self-administered for this practice set). Select the best answer for each
question.
Section I: Logical Reasoning (Questions 1–38)
Each question is followed by a short argument or set of facts. Choose the answer that most
logically completes or addresses the argument.
1. Economist: In the past decade, the country of Belgravia has seen a 20% increase in the
number of university graduates. However, the average starting salary for these
graduates has decreased by 10% after adjusting for inflation. Therefore, the increased
supply of graduates must be driving down wages.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the economist’s argument?
(A) The number of jobs requiring a university degree increased by 25% over the same
, period.
(B) The cost of attending university in Belgravia has risen faster than inflation.
(C) Many of the new graduates are entering fields that have historically had low starting
salaries.
(D) The population of Belgravia grew by 5% during the past decade.
(E) A recession occurred in Belgravia during the last two years, causing widespread wage
stagnation across all sectors.
Answer: (E) The economist assumes the wage drop is due to increased supply. (E) provides
an alternative cause (recession) that would explain lower wages regardless of supply. (A)
would actually strengthen the idea that supply outpaced demand if jobs increased less
than graduates, but it does not address the causal link.
2. Politician: Some people argue that we should not fund the space program because
there are problems on Earth like poverty. But this is a false choice. We can solve Earth’s
problems while also exploring space. Funding for space exploration constitutes less than
0.5% of the federal budget, a tiny fraction compared to social welfare programs.
The politician’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism for:
(A) Ignoring the possibility that the 0.5% could be used to fund other important
initiatives.
(B) Assuming that because a quantity is small in percentage terms, it is not significant in
absolute terms.
(C) Using evidence that is based on an outdated budgetary estimate.
(D) Relying on an analogy that is not strictly parallel.
(E) Failing to address the argument that space exploration is inherently dangerous.
Answer: (B) The politician counters the objection by noting the budget is a small
percentage. The flaw is assuming small percentage equals insignificance or that the funds
could not be effectively used elsewhere. (B) captures this.
3. If the city builds a new stadium, then property taxes will increase. If property taxes
increase, many residents will move to the suburbs. If many residents move to the
, suburbs, local businesses will suffer. Therefore, if the city builds a new stadium, local
businesses will suffer.
The reasoning in the argument is:
(A) Circular
(B) A causal oversimplification
(C) A valid chain of conditional logic
(D) An ad hominem attack
(E) A false dilemma
Answer: (C) The argument uses conditional statements: Stadium → Tax Increase → Move
→ Business Suffer. If the premises are true, the conclusion logically follows. This is a valid
hypothetical syllogism.
4. Museum director: We should acquire the Harrison painting. It is a masterpiece of early
20th-century art, and it would be a major draw for visitors.
Curator: But the Harrison painting is currently on loan to a museum across the country.
We cannot acquire it until the loan period ends.
The curator responds to the director by:
(A) Pointing out a factual impediment to the director’s proposal.
(B) Questioning the director’s assessment of the painting’s quality.
(C) Suggesting an alternative acquisition.
(D) Arguing that the director has a conflict of interest.
(E) Dismissing the director’s argument as irrelevant.
Answer: (A) The curator does not dispute the painting’s value; they point out a practical
obstacle (the loan) preventing immediate acquisition.
5. Biologist: The new species of frog discovered in the Amazon has a unique toxin. In lab
tests, this toxin kills antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Therefore, this toxin could be
developed into a drug to treat infections that currently have no cure.
The biologist’s argument assumes that:
(A) The toxin is not harmful to human cells.
, (B) Antibiotic-resistant bacteria are the only cause of untreatable infections.
(C) The frog population is large enough to sustain harvesting for drug development.
(D) The toxin will remain effective when administered to humans as it was in the lab.
(E) There are no other natural toxins that kill antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
Answer: (D) The argument leaps from lab efficacy to human treatment. It assumes that
what works in a petri dish will work in a complex human body without losing efficacy or
causing toxicity.
Questions 6–7 refer to the following passage.
In a study, participants who drank green tea daily for three months reported lower stress
levels than those who drank a placebo. The researchers concluded that green tea
reduces stress. However, the participants in the green tea group were also required to
attend weekly meditation sessions, while the placebo group did not.
6. Which of the following describes the flaw in the researchers’ reasoning?
(A) Correlation is mistaken for causation.
(B) A confounding variable was not controlled for.
(C) The sample size was too small to draw a conclusion.
(D) The placebo effect was ignored.
(E) The study used self-reported data, which is unreliable.
Answer: (B) The meditation sessions are a confounding variable. It is unclear whether the
stress reduction came from the tea or the meditation.
7. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion that green tea
itself reduces stress?
(A) Another study found that meditation alone reduces stress.
(B) The participants in the green tea group reported drinking an average of 4 cups per
day.
(C) A follow-up study gave both groups meditation sessions and green tea, and both
groups showed equal stress reduction.
