If you Google when you can use outside knowledge on the LSAT, you'll see blue links for days advising everything from "absolutely never," to "pretty much all the time."
Rather than try to convince you one way or another, we'll discuss some facts about the test itself that point to when it's safe to bring in outside information and when it isn't.
In this lesson, we will:
- Explain what we mean by "outside knowledge"
- Share an anecdote clarifying the outside knowledge trap
- Emphasize the value of sticking to the words on the page
- Learn when and how to use outside knowledge on the test
Let's get to it.
Defining "Outside Knowledge" on the LSAT
Again, if you Google this topic, you're bound to find several different definitions of what constitutes outside knowledge on the LSAT.
I'm going to keep this simple. When I say "outside knowledge" I'm referring to anything that isn't right there on the page in front of you.
The critical thinkers out there are probably already recognizing why this would be a hotly debated issue in LSAT land. We bring all sorts of lived experience along with us each time we take the test. We're inseparable from that knowledge to a certain extent. The test-makers know this and they wield it against you.
The Outside Knowledge Trap
Let me tell you a little story.
There's a bookshelf about five feet away from me right now. On that bookshelf are dozens of books, about a quarter of them written either about or by Machiavelli. I'm an unofficial scholar on the man and his subject matter. Humble brag over.
I can't recall which, but on one of my official LSAT administrations, I was faced with a Reading Comp passage about Machiavelli. I don't recall many details about the passage itself, but I do remember the passage's matter-of-fact tone and that it was full of information I disagreed with.
Why do I remember? Because in hindsight, I'm certain I bombed the questions.
I completely forgot my training. I looked for any opportunity to argue with the author and self-righteously tout my knowledge. It was a dumpster fire. More accurately, I was a dumpster fire.
This is the essence of what I call the Outside Knowledge Trap. In short, the LSAT didn't care one iota about what I knew about Machiavelli and it doesn't care what you know either. Nobody was out there reviewing my wrong answers and giving me partial credit because they happened to see my point of view. The LSAT's not that kind of test.
Remember from our : the LSAT is a skills test, not a knowledge test. You don't need any outside knowledge whatsoever in order to be successful.
Which leads me to my next point.
Stick to the Text
My canned advice regarding outside knowledge is that, at best, it should be used to clarify what's right there in the text in front of you.
That doesn't mean you can't analogize to make abstract ideas more concrete or use examples from your personal experience to help you make sense of something complicated. Much the opposite (and we'll get there in a minute).
It does mean, however, that if you want to try and convince an LSAT question that it's wrong in some way or to argue with the wording of an answer choice, you're on a fool's errand.
It's dumb. And you're wasting time when you could be learning from your mistakes. Don't at me.
The passages say what they say on purpose. You're not meant to evaluate whether they're fact or fiction. You're meant to read them, understand what they mean (flawed or otherwise), and then apply that understanding.
When and How to Use Outside Knowledge
Now, for the nuance in this debate.
Yes, you can use outside knowledge on the LSAT, but as I said above, beware. Use it to better understand something you just read. Note the one-way nature of that advice.
Here are some examples of when and how it's appropriate:
- Use analogies to simplify complicated ideas and relationships
- Frame things that surprise you and what about them doesn't make sense (e.g., when a talk show host wants to ban talk shows)
- Use real-world examples to string together abstract ideas across an entire passage
Notice the power (and repeated use) of analogy here. Similar to , analogies can be one of the most valuable tools we use on the LSAT. They just need to be rooted in the words on the page, not the knowledge we bring with us to the test.
---
There you have it—the quick and dirty on outside knowledge.
Next, we finish Chapter 2 with some handy rules of thumb, then we're off to Logical Reasoning!
I'll see you there.