Parallel ReasoningDiff: Medium

Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Cooks use specific spices to make food hot, but because you can't tell them apart once the food is burning your mouth, no single spice is actually necessary.

Conclusion: None of the specific hot spices traditionally used in spicy cuisines is essential.

Reasoning: While a specific spice is used to create heat, once the food is spicy enough, you can't tell which spice is responsible for the sensation.

Analysis: The structure of this argument is: 'To achieve result X, you use a specific component. But because different components produce an indistinguishable result X, no single component is irreplaceable.' To parallel this, look for an argument where the inability to distinguish between the sources of an effect leads to the conclusion that the specific source doesn't matter. The logic hinges on the idea that if the 'output' is the same regardless of the 'input,' the specific 'input' is not a requirement.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

18.

Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to the argument above?

Correct Answer
A
It matches the pattern: underwater vision can be produced by any one of a variety of pigments, so no particular pigment is necessary. That is the same structure as hotness via any of various spices, so no single spice is irreplaceable.
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