Go Back   StudyChaCha 2024 2025 > StudyChaCha Discussion Forum > General Topics

  #1  
Old April 3rd, 2016, 11:32 AM
Unregistered
Guest
 
Default LSAT Topics

hii sir, I am preparing for the LSAT Examination will you please provide me the names of the topics of the LSAT Examination ?
Reply With Quote
Other Discussions related to this topic
Thread
MBA Accounting Topics
CMAT Topics
BPCL GD Topics
MBA Marketing GD Topics
NMIMS GD Topics
GD Topics for HCL
IIM GD PI Topics
MBA MRP Topics
CMAT GD Topics
Hot Gd Topics For MBA
IIM Ahmedabad WAT Topics
SSC CGL Important Topics
PHD Topics MBA HR
GD-PI MBA topics
IIM GD topics Shillong
Topics available for Ph.D
SBI Topics for G.D
IIM GD Topics Discussion
GD Topics For MBA Recruitment
PhD Topics on commerce






  #2  
Old April 3rd, 2016, 11:56 AM
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default Re: LSAT Topics

The Law School Admission Test (LSAT) is a standardized test required for admission into law schools approved by the American Bar Association

The topics of the LSAT Examination are :
Logical reasoning
Analytical Reasoning
Reading Comprehensive
Writing question Essay


Format of the LSAT Examination :

Logical Reasoning I
Question Type Number of Questions
Argument-based multiple-choice 24-26
Time Allotted: 35 minutes

Logical Reasoning II
Question Type Number of Questions
Argument-based multiple-choice 24-26
Time Allotted: 35 minutes

Analytical Reasoning
Question Type Number of Questions
Multiple-choice based on Logic Games passages 23-24
Time Allotted: 35 minutes

Reading Comprehension
Question Type Number of Questions
Passage-based multiple-choice 26-28
Time Allotted: 35 minutes

Experimental
Question Type
Another Logical Reasoning, Logic Games, or Reading Comprehension section
Number of Questions 24-28
Time Allotted: 35 minutes

Writing Sample
Question Type Essay writing
Number of Questions 1 essay
Time Allotted: 35 minutes


Sample questions :
Logical Reasoning


When pregnant lab rats are given caffeine equivalent to the amount a human would consume by drinking six cups of coffee per day, an increase in the incidence of birth defects results. When asked if the government would require warning labels on products containing caffeine, a spokesperson stated that it would not because the government would lose credibility if the finding of these studies were to be refuted in the future.

1. Which of the following is most strongly suggested by the government's statement above?

(A) A warning that applies to a small population is inappropriate.
(B) Very few people drink as many as six cups of coffee a day.
(C) There are doubts about the conclusive nature of studies on animals.
(D) Studies on rats provide little data about human birth defects.
(E) The seriousness of birth defects involving caffeine is not clear.

Analytical Reasoning

1. Buses 1, 2, and 3 make one trip each day, and they are the only ones that riders A, B, C, D, E, F, and G take to work.

Neither E nor G takes bus 1 on a day when B does.
G does not take bus 2 on a day when D does.
When A and F take the same bus, it is always bus 3.
C always takes bus 3.

Traveling together to work, B, C, and G could take which of the same buses on a given day?

(A) 1 only
(B) 2 only
(C) 3 only
(D) 2 and 3 only
(E) 1, 2, and 3

Reading Comprehension

Many, perhaps most, well-disposed, practical people would, if they had to designate a philosophy that comes closest to expressing their unstated principles, pick utilitarianism. The philosophy that proclaims as its sovereign criterion the procuring of the greatest good of the greatest number has indeed served as a powerful engine of legal reform and rationalization. And it is a crucial feature of utilitarianism that it is consequences that count. Now it is interesting that some judgments that are actually made in the law and elsewhere do not appear to accord with this thoroughgoing consequentialism. For instance, both in law and morals there are many instances of a distinction being made between direct and indirect intention — i.e., the distinction between on the one hand the doing of evil as an end in itself or on the other hand bringing about the same evil result as a consequence of one's direct ends or means. So also the distinction is drawn between the consequences that we bring about by our actions and consequences that come about through our failures to act. Also, when bad consequences ensue from our actions and what was done was in the exercise of a right or privilege, the law is less likely to lay those bad consequences at our doorstep. And, finally, if the only way to prevent some great harm would be by inflicting a lesser harm on yourself or on others, then too the law is inclined to absolve us of responsibility for that avoidable greater harm. It is as if the net value of the consequences were not crucial, at least where net benefit is procured by the intentional infliction of harm.

Not only are these distinctions drawn in some moral systems, but there are numerous places in the law where they are made regularly. Since in utilitarianism and consequentialism in general the ultimate questions must always be whether and to what extent the valued end-state (be it happiness or possession of true knowledge) obtains at a particular moment, it is inevitable that the judgments on the human agencies that may affect this end-state must be wholly instrumental: human actions can be judged only by their tendency to produce the relevant end-states.

Indeed it may well be that even the point and contents of normative judgments — whether legal or moral — are concerned not just with particular end-states of the world but also with how end-states are brought about. These kinds of substantive judgments take the form: there are some things one should just never do — kill an innocent person, falsely accuse a defendant in a criminal proceeding, engage in sex for pay. These are to be contrasted to judgments that this or that is an unfortunate, perhaps terrible, result that (other things being equal) one would want to avoid. The former are — very generally — judgments of right and wrong. It is wrong to do this or that, even if the balance of advantages favors it; a person is right to do some particular thing (help a friend, protect his client's interests) even though more good will come if he does not.

1. The author's point in the passage is primarily that:

(A) law and utilitarianism are not always compatible.
(B) utilitarianism is the operating philosophy of most people.
(C) consequentialism is the basis for legal reform.
(D) direct and indirect intentions lead to different end-states.
(E) judgments about human actions can be made only by the resulting end-states.

2. Which of the following is NOT a feature of utilitarianism?

(A) Results are considered important.
(B) Consequences are considered important.
(C) The valued end-state is considered important.
(D) The means of achieving results are considered important.
(E) The net value of consequences is considered important
__________________
Answered By StudyChaCha Member
Reply With Quote
Reply




All times are GMT +6. The time now is 11:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8