Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: You can't be both a performer and an admin in this group. Since Leon and Marta aren't admins, the author claims they have to be performers.

Conclusion: Leon and Marta must be performers.

Reasoning: In this specific theater group, no one is both a performer and an administrator; Leon and Marta are members who are not administrators.

Analysis: The flaw here is a 'False Dilemma.' The premise states that the two categories are mutually exclusive (you can't be both), but it never states that they are exhaustive (you must be one). To parallel this, look for an argument that takes two things that cannot happen at the same time and incorrectly assumes that if one isn't happening, the other must be. The argument ignores the possibility that Leon and Marta could be members who are neither performers nor administrators.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

9.

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

Correct Answer
C
It mirrors the flaw by treating two locations (Canada and Mexico) as exhaustive. From “No company can have headquarters in both” and “not Mexico,” it concludes “Canada,” paralleling the invalid leap from not Y to X in the original.
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