PrepTest 113, Section 4, Question 14
The fact that politicians in a certain country(38 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(11 more words not shown)
- AThe fact that(39 more words not shown)
- BThe fact that(36 more words not shown)
- CThe fact that(40 more words not shown)
- DThe fact that(34 more words not shown)
- EThe fact that(32 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Wanting to spend less doesn't tell us why these politicians chose scholarships as the place to cut.
The author points to military spending as another option, one that could have saved even more. If saving money is the explanation, why pass up that option? Perhaps the politicians regard military spending as more essential. Imagine a country concerned about a military threat from a neighbor. It might protect defense funding despite wanting a smaller budget. That's a possible additional consideration, not a fact about this country.
That possibility helps us understand the limited claim: the spending goal alone doesn't fully explain the particular choice. The author isn't saying the politicians have no interest in saving money.
What we’re looking for
For the parallel, I'd start with a goal that doesn't fully explain a chosen action, followed by an alternative way to pursue the goal. Then we need to check how the argument uses that alternative.
Working the answers
- A
The current low income doesn't explain a preference that was already present when Phyllis earned much more. That's an appeal to her earlier behavior under different financial conditions. The original instead compares the chosen cut with another available way to achieve the current goal. A doesn't offer a better way for Phyllis to accomplish a goal she is pursuing.
- B
This compares Brooks with other students who manage both work and school. The original doesn't compare the country with other countries that successfully manage their budgets. It points to another choice available to the same decision-makers. B's other-person comparison plays a different role.
- C
This is tempting because it identifies something Sallie and Jim could have done differently: communicate more. That initially looks like the alternative action we wanted. But look back at the military-spending point. It wasn't merely another possibility; it would have reduced spending even more.
C says communication could have resolved the problem. It doesn't compare two routes toward a chosen goal and explain that the route they didn't select would have served that goal better. The argument about the politicians uses that comparison to question why they chose one route over another. C lacks that part.
- D
This gives us another circumstance explaining why Roger took all ten cats: nobody else was willing to take some. It doesn't point to a better way he could have obtained companionship. To match, we would want another option for companionship that served that goal better than adopting the cats. D explains the number through the lack of other adopters instead.
- ECorrect
Thelma's goal of fame corresponds to the politicians' goal of reducing spending. Acting is the chosen route, corresponding to cutting scholarships. Writing or directing is the unchosen route, corresponding to cutting military spending.
Crucially, the alternative isn't merely available. It makes becoming famous easier, just as the military cuts would reduce spending more. Both arguments use a route that better serves the stated goal to question whether that goal alone explains the actual choice. That comparative step makes E a closer match than C.
More Parallel Reasoning questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Reasoning questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.