Parallel ReasoningDiff: Easy
Logic Breakdown
Passage Summary: A business has narrowed its search to two qualified people, but since one of them is difficult to work with, they should pick the other one.
Conclusion: The company should choose to hire Chen for the position.
Reasoning: There are only two qualified candidates, and one of them has a history of interpersonal issues with colleagues.
Analysis: This argument follows a simple process of elimination: there are only two options, one is flawed, so the other must be the choice. When looking for a parallel, identify a structure that establishes an exhaustive list of two possibilities and then rejects one to conclude the other. It is a classic 'A or B; not A; therefore B' logical form.
Conclusion: The company should choose to hire Chen for the position.
Reasoning: There are only two qualified candidates, and one of them has a history of interpersonal issues with colleagues.
Analysis: This argument follows a simple process of elimination: there are only two options, one is flawed, so the other must be the choice. When looking for a parallel, identify a structure that establishes an exhaustive list of two possibilities and then rejects one to conclude the other. It is a classic 'A or B; not A; therefore B' logical form.
Passage Stimulus
Passage Redacted
Unlock Full Passage5.Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to the businessperson's argument?
Correct Answer
B
B closely parallels the structure: there are two initially acceptable options (Mexico or Peru); new information disqualifies one (floods make Peru difficult); therefore choose the other (Mexico).
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