Flawed Parallel ReasoningDiff: Hard
Logic Breakdown
Passage Summary: The rule is that only experienced people hit the sales target. Since I'm going to miss the target, I must not be experienced.
Conclusion: The speaker is not an experienced salesperson.
Reasoning: Only experienced salespeople can meet the quota, and the speaker will only be able to meet half of that quota.
Analysis: This argument actually contains valid logic, but the question asks us to identify a 'pattern of flawed reasoning.' Wait—let's re-evaluate the conditional: 'Only experienced salespeople will be able to meet the quota' means 'If you meet the quota, you are experienced.' The speaker then says 'I will not meet the quota, therefore I am not experienced.' This is a Mistaken Negation (If A, then B; Not A, therefore Not B). In the world of the LSAT, this is a formal logic error. Look for an answer choice that follows this exact 'If A, then B; Not A, therefore Not B' structure, even if it sounds somewhat plausible on the surface.
Conclusion: The speaker is not an experienced salesperson.
Reasoning: Only experienced salespeople can meet the quota, and the speaker will only be able to meet half of that quota.
Analysis: This argument actually contains valid logic, but the question asks us to identify a 'pattern of flawed reasoning.' Wait—let's re-evaluate the conditional: 'Only experienced salespeople will be able to meet the quota' means 'If you meet the quota, you are experienced.' The speaker then says 'I will not meet the quota, therefore I am not experienced.' This is a Mistaken Negation (If A, then B; Not A, therefore Not B). In the world of the LSAT, this is a formal logic error. Look for an answer choice that follows this exact 'If A, then B; Not A, therefore Not B' structure, even if it sounds somewhat plausible on the surface.
Passage Stimulus
Passage Redacted
Unlock Full Passage20.The pattern of flawed reasoning exhibited by the argument above is most similar to that exhibited by which one of the following?
Correct Answer
B
B matches the flawed form exactly: Only music lovers take this class (take class -> music lover); Hillary is not taking the class (not take); therefore she does not love music (not music lover). That’s the same inverse error.
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