PrepTest 120, Section 3, Question 22
If one does not have enough information to(34 more words not shown)
Of the following, which one(8 more words not shown)
- AEconomists should not(32 more words not shown)
- BWhen deciding which(51 more words not shown)
- CThough a researcher(37 more words not shown)
- DWhen one wants(37 more words not shown)
- EWhen there is(39 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Don't decide from information you already know is inadequate. Go get enough to make the decision well informed. That's the principle, and it has two parts: hold off on relying only on the insufficient information, then actively seek more. It isn't a demand for perfect knowledge of everything. The stopping point is enough information to make a well-informed decision.
What we’re looking for
I can see a practical concern: if someone treated this as “wait until every uncertainty disappears,” that person might never act. But that would be stronger than what the passage says. For this question, we're applying the stated rule. I'd look for a specific choice someone faces, an inadequate basis for deciding, and a recommendation to gather better information before choosing.
Working the answers
- A
Conflicting models based on current information cannot all be accurate, so using current data alone doesn't guarantee a sound prediction. That's a caution about judging models. It doesn't tell someone with inadequate information to seek more until a decision is well informed. Sharing words about information doesn't reproduce the whole principle.
- B
This says to weigh more than pay when choosing a career. Enjoyment and likely success matter too. But considering several factors isn't the same as acquiring information one lacks. Someone could follow B using only facts already known. The passage's instruction to seek additional information is missing.
- C
This comes closer because the researcher keeps looking for information. But it doesn't tie that search to a decision that can't yet be made well. Instead, it recommends always looking, even when the researcher already knows a great deal. The principle isn't an unlimited command to keep researching; it addresses an inadequate basis for a particular decision.
- DCorrect
The decision is which reliable car to buy. The inadequate information is the buyer's personal experience, which can cover only a limited range of cars and outcomes. The recommended next step is to study reliability histories collecting many owners' experiences. That matches the entire sequence: don't choose solely on a basis identified as inadequate; obtain broader information to support the choice.
- E
The first part fits: don't form an opinion from insufficient information. Then it gives up, declaring the meaning impossible to determine. The principle instead says to keep seeking information. Even if forming an opinion counts as a decision, stopping the inquiry doesn't match the required next step. D both postpones the inadequate choice and seeks a better basis.
More Parallel Reasoning questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Reasoning questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.