PrepTest 115, Section 2, Question 8
The kind of thoughts that keep a person(63 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AStucco is a(33 more words not shown)
- BCats can damage(30 more words not shown)
- CThis map indicates(25 more words not shown)
- DThese chemicals are(25 more words not shown)
- EThis island has(30 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The proposed solution keeps both sides busy. That's the feature to follow. Sleep-preventing thoughts can arise in either half of the brain. The activity gives each half something else to do: counting on one side, picturing sheep on the other. The author concludes that occupying both sides this way excludes the troublesome thoughts and lets the person sleep.
I still have a concern: counting sheep might itself keep someone awake. But this question asks us to match the reasoning, not repair that concern. We need to carry over the argument's arrangement even if we aren't completely convinced by its conclusion.
What we’re looking for
In plain terms, there are two possible sources of a problem. A proposed activity occupies both so they can't keep producing that problem. Look for that pattern. Merely mentioning two things isn't enough; the answer needs to give those two things the same roles.
Working the answers
- A
The author recommends replacing a poor insulating material with either of two good ones. That's a choice among alternatives, not a plan to occupy two possible sources of one problem. In the sleep argument, neither half of the brain is discarded in favor of a better half. Both are kept busy with something else.
- BCorrect
The cat's claws and teeth correspond to the two halves of the brain. Either can produce the unwanted outcome: damaged furniture for the cat, sleep-preventing thoughts for the person. The toy provides something else for both to do, just as counting and imagining sheep occupy both halves of the brain.
Then comes the same proposed result. Once the claws and teeth are occupied with the toy, the cat won't damage the furniture. Once both brain halves are occupied with the activity, the troublesome thoughts won't prevent sleep. We can question whether either distraction will work as completely as claimed, but the way the argument tries to solve the problem matches.
- C
Two roads of equal length are two available routes to the same destination. Choosing either one is supposed to satisfy the traveler's goal. We aren't occupying both roads to prevent an unwanted outcome. The original requires addressing both possible sources of the problem, not selecting one of two equivalent alternatives.
- D
There is a problem here: an explosion. But it arises when two otherwise harmless chemicals are combined. The solution keeps them apart. In the original, either half of the brain can produce the problem, and the solution occupies both. Keeping two jointly dangerous ingredients separate is different from distracting two independently troublesome sources.
- E
One harbor won't work for the ship, so the author selects the other. To resemble that reasoning, the sleep argument would need to say something like, “The left half keeps you awake, so use the right half instead.” But it says either half can produce the troublesome thoughts, and the solution gives both halves an activity. E's elimination of one option misses that structure.
More Parallel Reasoning questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Reasoning questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.