PrepTest 122, Section 4, Question 24
Most of the employees of the Compujack Corporation(25 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(20 more words not shown)
- AMost gardeners are(30 more words not shown)
- BMost of Molly's(27 more words not shown)
- CMost gardeners are(34 more words not shown)
- DMost gardeners are(33 more words not shown)
- EMost of Molly's(33 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What if Compujack pays everyone poorly? Most computer programmers elsewhere could earn excellent salaries while every programmer at this particular company earns much less.
The two uses of “most” concern different groups. First, we're looking within Compujack: most employees are programmers. Then we're looking at programmers generally: most receive excellent salaries. The second fact doesn't tell us where Compujack's programmers fall. They could all be in the lower-paid minority.
What we’re looking for
For the parallel flaw, preserve that structure. Most of a particular group belong to a broader category. Most members of that broader category have some trait. The argument then guarantees that at least one member of the particular group has the trait, without establishing the needed overlap. The order of the two premises can change; the groups and the strength of the conclusion need to match.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Molly's classmates correspond to Compujack's employees. Gardeners correspond to programmers, and great patience corresponds to an excellent salary. Most classmates are gardeners, and most gardeners are patient—but the gardeners in Molly's class could all belong to the impatient minority.
Imagine Molly attends a class full of impatient gardeners. That class could exist even if most gardeners elsewhere are patient. A nevertheless guarantees that at least one classmate is patient, just as the original guarantees an excellent salary for at least one employee. The same unproved overlap produces the same conclusion.
- B
“Could” changes the task. The facts allow some classmates to be patient; they simply don't guarantee it. B expresses a possibility consistent with the premises. The original's mistake is insisting that an employee must receive an excellent salary, not allowing that someone might.
- C
This is very close, and it does make the same basic mistake about the two majorities. But it adds a restriction to the conclusion: the patient classmate must also be a gardener. The original only concludes that some Compujack employee receives an excellent salary; it doesn't specify that the employee is a programmer. A preserves the original's conclusion exactly, while C narrows who must satisfy it. C is still flawed, but A is the closer parallel.
- D
The second premise concerns most of Molly's classmates who garden, and it tells us they're women. That isn't the original's premise about most members of the whole starting group belonging to the broader category. D adds another subgroup and concludes something about female classmates. Its chain of groups no longer matches employees, programmers, and excellent salaries.
- E
Both majorities are within the same group: Molly's classmates. More than half are patient gardeners, and more than half are women. Those two majorities must overlap. If they didn't, together they would require more classmates than the class contains. So at least one female classmate must be a patient gardener. This conclusion is supported; the original's majorities concern different groups and don't force the needed overlap.
More Parallel Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.