Systematic Thinking on Logic Games (LSAT)

I've posted before on the importance of viewing the rules given in logic games as a system rather than as individual rules. When this begins happening naturally, you can be sure you're improving at this section of the exam. The tricky part is that how quickly it comes naturally will vary by person, but that just means that for some, more practice will be required. 

Let me try an example to illustrate again what I mean by systematic thinking in this context. 

Imagine a grouping game in which people are attending an event in one of three rooms. And for simplicity, let's call the three rooms 1, 2, and 3. 

Some rules:

A and B attend together in the same room number.

C attends in the room numbered immediately below D's room number.

In whichever room number E attends, E attends alone.

We've got 3 individual rules here, but you should fight the instinct to view them individually. Instead, let's look at the rules as a larger system.

We know that E attends alone. 

So, this might work: (example 1)

1: E

2: 

3: 

And this: (example 2) 

1: 

2: E

3: 

And this: (example 3)

1: 

2: 

3: E

But if we look at this rules as more of a system, we'll notice that as part of this system, C must attend in the room numbered immediately below D's room number. With E in 2, that's not possible since E attends in a room alone. The system does not allow for example 2. 

Instead, we're left with this: (example 1)

1: E

2: 

3: 

And this example: (example 2)

1: 

2: 

3: E

Let's add in the rule we know about C and D to example 1:

1: E, C

2: D

3: 

Or maybe:

1: E 

2: C

3: D

And for example 2, this works:

1: C

2: D

3:  E

and this:

1: 

2: C

3: D, E 

Part of our system also includes the rule that A has to attend with B. But that's quite open ended. If the system required that at least one person were in each room, that would be significant here. 

For example, let's say we had:

1: E, C

2: D

3: 

If every room had to have at least one person, then, since A and B go together, they'd need to go into room 3. It would look like the following:

1: E, C

2: D

3: A, B 

But since the system doesn't speak to that, A and B are free to float to any of the rooms. 

My point here is not at all to say that students, prior to answering any questions, need to write out all these possibilities the way I've done here. Some LSAT teachers do recommend that, but I tend to not be as adamant about creating all these possibilities up front. 

Instead, I recommend working through many (many) games and practicing seeing these rules as a larger system in which the rules limit other rules as they've done here. When that becomes natural is when these games, though never easy, become much more manageable!