Flawed Parallel ReasoningDiff: Medium
Logic Breakdown
Passage Summary: The speaker claims that since only expensive-to-resell cars are kept in good shape, keeping a car in good shape guarantees it will be expensive to resell.
Conclusion: Every vehicle that is well maintained will necessarily have a high resale value.
Reasoning: The argument assumes that because high resale value is a requirement for a vehicle to be well maintained, being well maintained is sufficient to guarantee a high resale value.
Analysis: This argument commits a classic 'Mistaken Reversal' of conditional logic. The premise establishes that high resale value is a necessary condition for maintenance (High Resale Value ← Well Maintained), but the conclusion treats it as a sufficient condition (Well Maintained → High Resale Value). To parallel this flaw, we need to find an answer choice that takes a 'None but' or 'Only' statement and incorrectly flips the direction of the arrow. It's like saying 'Only athletes wear jerseys, so anyone wearing a jersey must be an athlete'—it ignores the possibility of fans in the stands.
Conclusion: Every vehicle that is well maintained will necessarily have a high resale value.
Reasoning: The argument assumes that because high resale value is a requirement for a vehicle to be well maintained, being well maintained is sufficient to guarantee a high resale value.
Analysis: This argument commits a classic 'Mistaken Reversal' of conditional logic. The premise establishes that high resale value is a necessary condition for maintenance (High Resale Value ← Well Maintained), but the conclusion treats it as a sufficient condition (Well Maintained → High Resale Value). To parallel this flaw, we need to find an answer choice that takes a 'None but' or 'Only' statement and incorrectly flips the direction of the arrow. It's like saying 'Only athletes wear jerseys, so anyone wearing a jersey must be an athlete'—it ignores the possibility of fans in the stands.
Passage Stimulus
Passage Redacted
Unlock Full Passage6.The flawed nature of the argument can most effectively be demonstrated by noting that, by parallel reasoning, we could argue that
Correct Answer
D
All city dwellers prefer waterfalls to traffic jams (CD -> PWF), therefore anyone who prefers waterfalls to traffic jams is a city dweller (PWF -> CD). This exactly mirrors the converse error in the stimulus.
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