Flawed Parallel ReasoningDiff: Hard
Logic Breakdown
Passage Summary: Martha's friend says no daisies are tasty and edible, but Martha thinks her friend is wrong because some daisies are chrysanthemums, and some chrysanthemums are tasty and edible.
Conclusion: The friend's claim that there are no palatable, edible daisies is incorrect.
Reasoning: Some daisies belong to the chrysanthemum family, and some members of the chrysanthemum family are both edible and palatable.
Analysis: Martha is making a classic 'some' plus 'some' error. Just because Group A (daisies) overlaps with Group B (chrysanthemums), and Group B overlaps with Group C (tasty/edible things), it doesn't mean Group A and Group C have any overlap at all. It’s like saying some New Yorkers are tall and some tall people are professional basketball players, so some New Yorkers must be professional basketball players—it's possible, but the logic doesn't guarantee it. Look for an answer choice that mimics this 'overlapping categories' flaw where the two sub-groups might never actually meet.
Conclusion: The friend's claim that there are no palatable, edible daisies is incorrect.
Reasoning: Some daisies belong to the chrysanthemum family, and some members of the chrysanthemum family are both edible and palatable.
Analysis: Martha is making a classic 'some' plus 'some' error. Just because Group A (daisies) overlaps with Group B (chrysanthemums), and Group B overlaps with Group C (tasty/edible things), it doesn't mean Group A and Group C have any overlap at all. It’s like saying some New Yorkers are tall and some tall people are professional basketball players, so some New Yorkers must be professional basketball players—it's possible, but the logic doesn't guarantee it. Look for an answer choice that mimics this 'overlapping categories' flaw where the two sub-groups might never actually meet.
Passage Stimulus
Passage Redacted
Unlock Full Passage20.Which one of the following has a flawed pattern of reasoning most like that in Martha's reasoning?
Correct Answer
C
C has the same flaw: some of Noriko’s sisters are on the debate team; some team members are poor students; therefore at least one of Noriko’s sisters is a poor student. That is the same invalid ‘some–some’ transitive move.
Upgrade Your Prep
Ready to go beyond free explanations?
LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.
Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal