Flawed Parallel ReasoningDiff: Hard
Logic Breakdown
Passage Summary: A report says a program worked based on some numbers. A very smart senator says the program didn't work. Therefore, the report's numbers must be lies.
Conclusion: The statistics provided in the interior ministry's report regarding land reclamation are definitely wrong.
Reasoning: A highly intelligent and distinguished mathematician, Senator Armand, claims the reclamation program was not successful, so the data supporting its success must be incorrect.
Analysis: This argument suffers from an inappropriate appeal to authority. It dismisses empirical data (the 19 percent increase) simply because a 'brilliant' person disagrees with the conclusion drawn from that data. The senator's brilliance in mathematics doesn't automatically mean she is right about land reclamation, nor does her disagreement prove the underlying data is false. To match this flaw, look for an answer choice that rejects a factual claim solely because a prestigious or impressive person says otherwise.
Conclusion: The statistics provided in the interior ministry's report regarding land reclamation are definitely wrong.
Reasoning: A highly intelligent and distinguished mathematician, Senator Armand, claims the reclamation program was not successful, so the data supporting its success must be incorrect.
Analysis: This argument suffers from an inappropriate appeal to authority. It dismisses empirical data (the 19 percent increase) simply because a 'brilliant' person disagrees with the conclusion drawn from that data. The senator's brilliance in mathematics doesn't automatically mean she is right about land reclamation, nor does her disagreement prove the underlying data is false. To match this flaw, look for an answer choice that rejects a factual claim solely because a prestigious or impressive person says otherwise.
Passage Stimulus
Passage Redacted
Unlock Full Passage20.The argument above exhibits an erroneous pattern of reasoning most similar to that exhibited by which one of the following?
Correct Answer
E
E matches the pattern: an observer reports a result (Lee won), and then an unrelated expert (a bicycle engineering expert) asserts that result is impossible if Adams competed; therefore the report is declared false. That parallels rejecting a report’s accuracy solely because an authority says the resulting outcome couldn’t be.
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