Ok, so these are really questions in formal logic. You can use diagrams, but really its better to learn to do it analytically anyway. Let's take a look at one of the problems in your link below.

A university library budget committee must reduce exactly five of eight areas of expenditure—G, L, M, N, P, R, S, and W—in accordance with the following conditions:

​

1. If both G and S are reduced, W is also reduced.
2. If N is reduced, neither R nor S is reduced.
3. If P is reduced, L is not reduced.
4. Of the three areas L, M, and R, exactly two are reduced.

#### Question 1

If both M and R are reduced, which one of the following is a pair of areas neither of which could be reduced?

​

1. G, L
2. G, N
3. L, N
4. L, P
5. P, S

​

To solve this first recognize that reducing expenditure doesn't really matter.

Since there are two possibilities we either have A is reduced or A is not reduced.

So, instead I'll write A and not A. You can, and should, do this with all of your problems.

We have 4 kinds of statements. If A then B, not A, A and B, A or B.

So, now we can rewrite the rules in a standard form. I'm going somewhere with this I promise.

1. if G and S then W
2. if N then not R and not S
3. if P then not L
4. L and M, or M and R, or L and R, but not L and M and R.

Rule 4 got more complicated, but doing this makes it easier to think about.

Now the ides is that we want to figure out all of the consequences.

So our problem tells us that we know M and R. We want to find 2 things that can't be true.

Let keep track of them in a list.

M, R

Now by rule 4 we know that L can't be true (otherwise M, L, and R would all be true).

M, R, not L

We also know that N can't be true, but the reason is a little obscure.

if N is true, then R isn't, but R is in our list, so that's a contradiction.

M, R, not L, not N

That's all we can do for now, but let's look at our choices. Remember the question asked which 2 aren't reduced.

1. not G and not L
2. not G and not N
3. not L and not N
4. not L and not P
5. not P and not S

In this list we can see that 3 has to be true, because both not L and not N are already in our list.

​

You can solve all of these problems this way by finding all of the consequences. It takes some work, but I don't know of any reason why vision should get in the way.

​

Some useful rules.

not not A is the same as A.

if A then B is the same as if not B then not A.

not (A and B) is the same as (not A) or (not B).

not (A or B) is the same as (not A) and (not B).

​

Anyway, I know this was long, but hopefully this method is helpful.

I am a sighted parent, but I have taken the LSAT (although it was many years ago). I am happy to help if I can although I hope a TVI will be able to provide better strategies to assist you.

It is true that a strategy to answer these questions is to create a diagram in order to help solve the question. For those unaware these are logic questions like A lives next to B, but across the street from C, D and B are not neighbors, etc.

The other strategy is to rewrite the rules of the puzzle using logic symbols or rewrite them yourself to quickly reference them in a way that makes sense to you. So from the example you linked to:

If G AND S then W

If N then NOT R AND NOT S

IF P then NOT L

Will you be allowed to bring anything with you? Anything tactile that can help you? Or are there tight restrictions?

For instance, if you get one of those divided containers to store small bits like screws and nails, can you use that as a tactile grid? Then maybe use game pieces, like monopoly pieces, to represent each entity as the row and column headers? Then have some some binary pieces, one type to represent yes, and one type to represent no. Then use that to set up a tactile, physical diagram. Is something like that a possibility?

What’s your deadline? I am sighted, and also want to take the LSAT... I haven’t ever done anything like this before, but my mom is blind (has been blind for only a few years, due to macular degeneration) and I try to help her out when I can.

She’s in Georgia, and I’m in California.

If no one else who is a better alternative volunteers, I will do what I can.

I can help you. I have taken the LSAT two times (second time to try to beat my original score). I minored in philosophy in undergrad, which means I learned a lot of logic and reasoning, and it shows as the logic games were my strongest section both times. I also already have a law degree. I know you only have a month until the exam but I have a pretty open schedule at the moment and can devote the time needed to help you improve. We can also check to see if there’s any way for you qualify for any exam accommodations. Message me tomorrow if you’re interested.