Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: If it rains a lot, two things happen: trees bloom and reservoirs fill up. Because the reservoirs aren't full, the author thinks the trees won't bloom either.

Conclusion: The trees will not blossom this May.

Reasoning: If it rains a lot, trees blossom and reservoirs fill; since the reservoirs aren't full, the trees won't blossom.

Analysis: This argument suffers from a classic formal logic error. It correctly concludes that because the reservoirs aren't full, it didn't rain more than 5cm (Modus Tollens). However, it then incorrectly assumes that because it didn't rain that much, the trees will not blossom. This is a 'Negating the Antecedent' flaw because the trees might blossom for reasons other than heavy April rain. We need to find an answer choice that follows this 'If A then B and C; Not C, therefore Not B' pattern.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

21.

Which one of the following exhibits a flawed pattern of reasoning most similar to the flawed pattern of reasoning in the argument above?

Correct Answer
A
Choice A has the same flawed pattern: If garlic in pantry, then fresh (G → F). If garlic in pantry, then potatoes on stairs (G → P). Not P, so not fresh (~F). From ~P we can validly infer ~G, but then it illicitly concludes ~~F~~ from ~G. That mirrors the stimulus’s mistaken leap from ~A to ~B.
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
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep