PrepTest 117, Section 4, Question 21
A small car offers less protection in an(29 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(12 more words not shown)
- AAn artist's best(44 more words not shown)
- BIt is best(51 more words not shown)
- CFor this work,(34 more words not shown)
- DAlthough it is(51 more words not shown)
- EA person who(44 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
How much less likely is the accident? A small improvement in avoiding crashes might not outweigh a much worse outcome when a crash happens. The argument gives us a tradeoff without telling us its size.
Still, we can follow the author's choice: drive the smaller car despite its disadvantage, because it offers another advantage. Less protection counts against it; being more maneuverable counts in its favor.
What we’re looking for
We're asked to find the most similar reasoning, not decide which car to buy. Start with the broad pattern: recommend one option despite a cost because of a benefit. Then compare how closely each answer reproduces the particular cost and benefit. A choice can look promising without being the closest match.
Working the answers
- A
Fame creates demands for public appearances, those demands interfere with making art, and the resulting work can damage an artist's reputation. That's a sequence of consequences. It doesn't recommend an option despite one disadvantage because it lowers the chance of encountering the very situation in which that disadvantage matters.
- B
Keeping the child indoors has a cost, unhappiness, and a benefit, preparation for lifelong learning. That resembles the broad tradeoff. But the benefit doesn't reduce the chance of the event in which the child suffers the cost. Reading's educational benefit and missing outdoor play are separate considerations. The car argument has a more specific connection between its advantage and disadvantage.
- C
This is a strong contender if we only look for costs and benefits. Lighter vehicles are less durable but cheaper to replace, so the author recommends them.
The closer comparison matters, though. Being cheaper to replace doesn't make needing a replacement less likely. It makes replacement less costly when it happens. In the original, the advantage is a lower chance of a crash, while the disadvantage is less protection if a crash occurs. C doesn't reproduce that relationship.
- D
This recommends moderation to prevent the binges that might follow total restriction. It doesn't identify a disadvantage of moderate consumption in the event of a binge, then accept that disadvantage because moderation makes binges less likely. Sharing the idea of preventing trouble isn't enough to match all the roles.
- ECorrect
Vigorous exercise is the small car. Having less body fat available during a wasting illness is the reduced protection during a crash. Decreasing the chance of that illness is the reduced chance of crashing.
Both recommend an option that leaves you less protected if a bad event happens because the option makes that event less likely. That's why E beats C: it matches not only the tradeoff, but also the precise relationship between the risk of the event and the consequences if it occurs.
More Parallel Reasoning questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Reasoning questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.