Identify the conclusion in LSAT arguments by asking: What is the author ultimately trying to prove? The conclusion is the one statement that receives support from other statements but doesn't itself support any other statement. Use three systematic techniques: 1) The Ultimate Point Question - Ask what the author fundamentally wants you to believe; that's the main conclusion. 2) The Why Test - Ask 'why?' about each statement; if other statements answer 'why,' those are premises supporting that conclusion. The statement that receives support but doesn't provide support to anything else is the main conclusion. 3) The Therefore Test - When you have two potential conclusions, state one, then 'therefore,' then the other; if it makes sense, the first supports the second (which is the main conclusion). Test the reverse to confirm. Remember that conclusions can appear anywhere in the argument—first sentence, middle, or last—so always analyze logical relationships rather than relying on position. Look for conclusion indicators like "therefore," "thus," "so," and "hence," but don't rely solely on them as they can also mark intermediate conclusions. The main conclusion is what the entire argument builds toward, while intermediate conclusions are stepping stones that are supported by premises AND support the main conclusion.

A main conclusion on the LSAT is the ultimate point or primary claim that the author wants you to accept—it's the reason the argument exists and what everything else in the argument is designed to support. The main conclusion has two defining characteristics: 1) It receives support from other statements in the argument (premises and intermediate conclusions provide reasons to believe it), and 2) It doesn't itself support any other statement in the argument (it's the destination, not a stepping stone). The main conclusion represents the author's final position, the claim they're fundamentally trying to prove or convince you to believe. It can appear anywhere in the argument: at the beginning as a thesis statement (~25-35% of the time), embedded in the middle with supporting evidence before and after (~15-25%), or at the end as a culminating claim (~40-50%). Main conclusions are often (but not always) signaled by conclusion indicators like "therefore," "thus," "so," "hence," "consequently," "it follows that," or "clearly." However, these same indicators can also mark intermediate conclusions, so position and indicators alone are insufficient—you must analyze the support structure. According to recent LSAT data, Main Point questions explicitly test conclusion identification and account for approximately 7% of Logical Reasoning questions, but identifying conclusions is essential for virtually all LR question types.

The Therefore Test is a systematic technique for distinguishing main conclusions from intermediate conclusions when an LSAT argument contains multiple conclusions. Here's the step-by-step process: Step 1 - Identify two statements that appear to be conclusions (they seem to be claims being argued for, not just premises). Step 2 - State the first statement, then say 'therefore,' then state the second statement. Step 3 - Evaluate whether this arrangement makes logical sense—does the first statement provide a reason to believe the second? Step 4 - Test the reverse order: state the second statement, then 'therefore,' then the first statement. Step 5 - Compare which order sounds more logical and natural. Step 6 - The statement that comes AFTER 'therefore' in the better-sounding arrangement is likely the main conclusion; the statement that comes BEFORE 'therefore' is supporting it (either a premise or intermediate conclusion). Example: Testing 'Meditation reduces stress' vs. 'Everyone should meditate.' Order 1: 'Meditation reduces stress, therefore everyone should meditate' ✓ Makes perfect sense (fact supports recommendation). Order 2: 'Everyone should meditate, therefore meditation reduces stress' ✗ Illogical (recommendations don't prove facts). Conclusion: 'Everyone should meditate' is the main conclusion. The Therefore Test works because it reveals support relationships—the statement before 'therefore' supports the statement after. Main conclusions receive support from intermediate conclusions and premises but don't provide support to other statements.

An intermediate conclusion (also called a subsidiary conclusion or sub-conclusion) on the LSAT is a statement that serves BOTH as a conclusion AND as a premise within the same argument—it has a dual role that makes it a critical link in complex reasoning chains. As a conclusion: It receives support from one or more premises—there are reasons given in the argument to believe it's true. As a premise: It provides support for the main conclusion—it's used as a reason to believe the ultimate claim. Think of it as a stepping stone or intermediate link in the chain of reasoning from basic premises to the ultimate main conclusion. The flow: Premises → Intermediate Conclusion → Main Conclusion. Example argument: "All successful companies innovate constantly. Innovation requires risk-taking. Therefore, all successful companies must take risks. So companies that avoid risk will not succeed." Analysis: "All successful companies must take risks" is an intermediate conclusion—it's supported by the first two premises (companies innovate, innovation requires risk) AND it supports the main conclusion (companies that avoid risk won't succeed). The main conclusion is "companies that avoid risk will not succeed"—it receives support from the intermediate conclusion but doesn't support anything else; it's the ultimate point. Not all arguments contain intermediate conclusions; simpler arguments go directly from premises to main conclusion. Complex arguments can have multiple intermediate conclusions forming a logical chain. Distinguishing intermediate from main conclusions is critical for Main Point questions, where intermediate conclusions often appear as trap answers designed to catch students who didn't carefully analyze the argument's complete structure.

Conclusion indicators on the LSAT are words or phrases that often signal that a conclusion follows. The most common and reliable conclusion indicators include: therefore (the single most reliable indicator), thus, so, hence (very strong signals), consequently, as a result, accordingly (show logical consequence), it follows that, this shows that, this proves that (explicit conclusion markers), this demonstrates that, this indicates that, this suggests that (imply inference), we can conclude that, this means that (direct conclusion signals), and clearly, evidently, obviously (suggest the claim follows from evidence). Important caveats about conclusion indicators: 1) Not all conclusions use indicators - Many LSAT arguments have conclusions with NO indicator words at all, requiring you to identify them through logical analysis using the Therefore Test or Why Test. 2) Indicators can signal EITHER main OR intermediate conclusions - Don't assume 'therefore' automatically marks the main conclusion; many intermediate conclusions use 'therefore' as well. You must analyze the complete argument structure. 3) Context matters - Some indicator words like 'clearly' or 'obviously' might be used to emphasize premises rather than signal conclusions. 4) Never rely solely on indicators - Always verify using logical analysis. The presence of an indicator is a helpful clue but not definitive proof. Additionally, recognize premise indicators that identify what is NOT a conclusion: because, since, for, given that, due to, as shown by, the reason is that, after all, assuming that, seeing that, owing to. Statements with premise indicators provide support rather than receive it, so they cannot be conclusions.

The conclusion can appear ANYWHERE in LSAT arguments: beginning, middle, or end. This deliberate variation is designed to test whether you understand logical structure rather than rely on position shortcuts. According to analysis of official LSAT PrepTests: End position (last sentence) - Approximately 40-50% of the time. The argument builds from premises to a culminating final conclusion. Example: "Plastic harms oceans. Alternatives exist and work well. So we should ban plastics.' Beginning position (first sentence) - Approximately 25-35% of the time. The argument starts with the main conclusion as a thesis statement, then provides supporting premises. Example: 'We should ban single-use plastics. They harm marine life and alternatives exist.' Middle position - Approximately 15-25% of the time. Premises appear first, the main conclusion comes in the middle, and additional supporting evidence follows. Example: 'Plastics harm oceans. Therefore, we should ban them. Alternatives are readily available.' Critical warning: Never assume the last sentence is the conclusion—this assumption leads to errors 50-60% of the time. The LSAT deliberately places conclusions in various positions to ensure you're analyzing logical relationships using the Therefore Test or Why Test rather than using shortcuts. Always ask: What is the author ULTIMATELY trying to prove? Then verify using support structure analysis regardless of where that claim appears physically in the argument. Position is irrelevant to logical function—a statement at the beginning can be the main conclusion if everything else supports it, and a statement at the end can be a premise if it doesn't receive support from anything else."

The Why Test is a technique for identifying conclusions by analyzing support relationships in LSAT arguments. Here's the complete process: For any statement, ask 'Why?' If other statements in the argument answer 'why' about that statement, those statements are premises supporting it, confirming it's a conclusion (either main or intermediate). If you can't find statements answering 'why,' it's probably a premise, not a conclusion. For the main conclusion specifically: You should be able to ask 'why?' and have the argument's premises and intermediate conclusions answer it, BUT the main conclusion itself shouldn't answer 'why?' about any other statement in the argument. This is the key distinction. Example argument: "Studies show exercise reduces depression. Depression decreases productivity. Therefore, exercise increases productivity. So employers should provide gym memberships." Apply Why Test to 'exercise increases productivity': Ask 'Why does exercise increase productivity?' Answer: 'Because exercise reduces depression' and 'because depression decreases productivity' (premises answer). This confirms it's A conclusion. Apply Why Test to 'employers should provide gym memberships': Ask 'Why should employers provide gym memberships?' Answer: 'Because exercise increases productivity' (intermediate conclusion answers). This is supported. Final check: Does 'employers should provide gym memberships' answer 'why?' about anything else? No—it's the final recommendation, not supporting anything else. Conclusion: 'Employers should provide gym memberships' is the main conclusion because it receives support but doesn't provide support. 'Exercise increases productivity' is an intermediate conclusion because it both receives support (from premises) and provides support (to main conclusion). The Why Test is particularly useful when arguments lack indicator words or when you need to distinguish between multiple potential conclusions in complex argument structures.

Main Point questions (also called Main Conclusion or Identify the Conclusion questions) account for approximately 7% of LSAT Logical Reasoning questions according to recent PrepTest analysis and frequency data. With each Logical Reasoning section containing approximately 24-26 questions, you can expect about 1-2 Main Point questions per LR section, or 2-4 Main Point questions across the two Logical Reasoning sections on a complete LSAT administration. While this might seem like a relatively small percentage compared to other question types like Strengthen/Weaken (~15-18%), Necessary Assumption (~10-12%), or Flaw questions (~16%), Main Point questions are disproportionately important for several critical reasons: 1) Foundation for all other question types - Understanding Main Point is essential for virtually every Logical Reasoning question because you must identify the conclusion to answer Assumption, Strengthen, Weaken, Flaw, and Parallel Reasoning questions correctly. You can't evaluate what would strengthen an argument if you don't know what the argument is trying to prove. 2) High-value score improvement - Main Point questions are among the more straightforward LR questions IF you master conclusion identification systematically, making them high-value targets for score improvement. 3) Skill transferability - The conclusion identification skills tested transfer directly to Reading Comprehension, where identifying main points, author's purpose, and passage structure is crucial. 4) Core tested competency - According to official LSAC materials, recognizing conclusions and understanding argument structure is explicitly listed as one of the ten core skills tested throughout Logical Reasoning sections, emphasizing its centrality to legal reasoning and LSAT success overall.

Distinguish main conclusions from intermediate conclusions using these systematic approaches: 1) The Ultimate Point Test - Ask "What is the author ULTIMATELY trying to prove? What's the final destination of this argument?" That's the main conclusion. Intermediate conclusions are stepping stones toward that ultimate point, not the final destination themselves. 2) The Support Structure Test - Main conclusions receive support from other statements but don't provide support to anything else in the argument. Intermediate conclusions BOTH receive support (from premises) AND provide support (to the main conclusion). This dual role—being both supported and supporting—is the defining characteristic of intermediate conclusions. 3) The Therefore Test - State one conclusion, then 'therefore,' then the other conclusion. If it makes sense, the first supports the second (which is the main conclusion). Test the reverse order to confirm. The statement that sounds better AFTER 'therefore' is typically the main conclusion. 4) The 'Why' Test - Ask 'why?' about each conclusion. For intermediate conclusions, premises answer 'why' about them, AND the intermediate conclusion itself answers 'why' about the main conclusion. For main conclusions, premises and intermediate conclusions answer 'why' about them, but the main conclusion doesn't answer 'why' about any other statement. Complete Example: "Smoking damages lungs. Lung damage reduces athletic performance. Therefore, smoking reduces athletic performance. So athletes should not smoke." Analysis using all tests: Ultimate Point: The author ultimately wants to prove athletes shouldn't smoke (recommendation). Support Structure: "Smoking reduces athletic performance" receives support from first two premises AND supports "athletes should not smoke." This dual role makes it intermediate. "Athletes should not smoke" receives support but provides none—it's the main conclusion. Therefore Test: "Smoking reduces performance, therefore athletes shouldn't smoke" ✓ Makes sense. Reverse doesn't work. Conclusion: "Athletes should not smoke" is the main conclusion; "smoking reduces performance" is intermediate.

Common mistakes in identifying LSAT conclusions that lead to wrong answers include: 1) Position Bias - Assuming the last sentence is always the conclusion when in reality, conclusions appear in the last sentence only 40-50% of the time, in the first sentence 25-35% of the time, and in the middle 15-25% of the time. 2) Indicator Word Overreliance - Assuming 'therefore' always marks the main conclusion when it can also introduce intermediate conclusions, premises in certain contexts, or sub-points. Indicators are helpful clues but never definitive proof. 3) Selecting Intermediate Conclusions - Choosing a stepping stone conclusion rather than the ultimate point on Main Point questions. This is the single most common wrong answer trap because intermediate conclusions feel like conclusions (they are supported by premises) but aren't the main point. 4) Confusing Premises with Conclusions - Selecting a supporting statement that provides evidence but never receives support itself. Premises support conclusions; they aren't supported by other statements in the argument. 5) Ignoring Opposing Viewpoints - Missing that the argument structure often starts with an opposing view and the main conclusion immediately follows to refute it, typically introduced by contrast words like 'however,' 'but,' or 'yet.' 6) Not Using Verification Tests - Failing to confirm conclusion identification with the Therefore Test or Why Test, relying instead on gut feeling or quick reading. 7) Background Information Confusion - Treating context, definitions, or background facts as if they were conclusions when they're actually just scene-setting information. 8) Summary Confusion - Thinking the conclusion must be a comprehensive summary of all points when it's actually a specific claim the argument supports. 9) Not Reading Completely - Trying to identify conclusions while still reading rather than waiting until you've absorbed the complete argument structure. 10) Scope Mismatch - Selecting answers that are too broad, too narrow, or that introduce concepts not in the original argument. The correct main conclusion matches the scope and content of what the argument actually establishes.