PrepTest 105, Section 1, Question 12
Alice will volunteer to work on the hospital(60 more words not shown)
In which one of the(18 more words not shown)
- ABill and Steve(36 more words not shown)
- BLeon will go(33 more words not shown)
- CJim will go(34 more words not shown)
- DIf Paula works(35 more words not shown)
- ETherese will work(39 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Alice has two requirements. Bruce has to volunteer, and a majority of the other volunteers have to promise to choose him as manager. Without both, she won't volunteer. Bruce is willing, but nobody will make the management promise. That is enough to settle Alice's decision. Even if Bruce volunteers, the other requirement fails. There's no need to invent an objection here: the conclusion that Alice won't volunteer follows from the restriction she gave.
What we’re looking for
For the parallel question, keep track of the roles. Someone will participate only if two things happen. One of those requirements fails, so that person certainly won't participate. Look for the same definite exclusion, with the people and activity changed.
Working the answers
- A
Bill having enough time is one requirement for Bill and Steve to work together. Having many errands suggests a time problem, but it doesn't establish that Bill lacks enough time. The conclusion is also only that Steve will probably work alone. That differs from two stated requirements, a definite failure of one, and a certain conclusion that the person won't participate.
- B
Vera's attendance is required for Leon to attend. But learning that Leon doesn't plan to go doesn't show that Vera won't go. She could attend without him. This reasons from the outcome not happening to a supposed failure of its requirement. The original starts with a failed requirement and rules out the outcome.
- CCorrect
Jim takes Alice's role. Sam and Elaine going are his two requirements, corresponding to Bruce volunteering and the promised selection of Bruce as manager. Sam is going, but Elaine isn't. Since one required person won't be there, Jim certainly won't go.
Both arguments work because satisfying one requirement cannot compensate for failing another. The original only says Bruce is willing to volunteer, but that doesn't affect the decisive comparison: the missing management promise rules Alice out regardless, just as Elaine's absence rules Jim out.
- D
The first rule concerns Jane working only with Arthur if Paula works with Elise. The next rule gives a different arrangement if Paula doesn't work: Elise also works with Jane. Neither says that Arthur must remain in that second arrangement. D combines details across different conditions to reach a conclusion about Arthur. It doesn't rule out someone's participation because one of two requirements failed.
- E
Maria's help and no rain are requirements for Therese to work. Maria will help, but we aren't told it will rain. Instead, the answer claims that if it doesn't rain, Therese certainly will work. That treats meeting the requirements as a guarantee of the outcome. She might still choose not to work. To match Alice, E would need a failed requirement—such as rain—and the conclusion that Therese won't work.
More Parallel Reasoning questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Reasoning questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.