PrepTest 149, Section 1, Question 6
The only vehicles that have high resale values(15 more words not shown)
The flawed nature of the(16 more words not shown)
- Asince none of(16 more words not shown)
- Bsince the best(14 more words not shown)
- Csince only those(24 more words not shown)
- Dsince all city(17 more words not shown)
- Esince one's need(24 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What if nobody wants the boat?
We could maintain an old boat beautifully and still struggle to sell it. The premise says a vehicle needs good maintenance to have a high resale value. It doesn't say maintenance is all it needs. Maybe buyers also have to find the vehicle desirable.
What we’re looking for
The conclusion treats meeting that one requirement as a guarantee of a high resale value. For the parallel reasoning, look for the same move: everyone in one group meets a requirement, so anyone meeting that requirement must belong to the group.
Working the answers
- A
Never having been pruned doesn't mean a plant needs no pruning. Maybe the whole garden is overgrown. This moves from what has happened to what needs to happen. It doesn't give us a requirement for belonging to a group and then assume that meeting the requirement puts someone in that group.
- B
The best mediators could have the longest records without the worst having the shortest. Perhaps the worst mediators have medium-length records, while some promising newcomers have the shortest. B jumps from one end of a ranking to the other. To match our argument, it would need to say that because the best mediators have long records, anyone with a long record must be one of the best.
- C
This starts promisingly: wanting to become an astronaut is a requirement for becoming one. But its conclusion ranks that desire as the most important factor. Our conclusion doesn't call maintenance the most important factor; it says maintenance guarantees high resale value. C would match if it concluded that everyone who wants to become an astronaut becomes one. Importance and a guarantee are different claims.
- DCorrect
A person who lives in the city must, under this premise, prefer waterfalls to traffic jams. But having that preference doesn't establish where someone lives. People in the country could share it.
Match the roles: city dwellers correspond to vehicles with high resale values. Preferring waterfalls corresponds to being well maintained. The premise says everyone in the first group has the second feature. The conclusion then treats having that feature as enough to get into the first group. The rural waterfall lover is like the well-maintained boat nobody wants: each meets the stated requirement without having the outcome the argument promises.
- E
Needing less medical care as health improves doesn't mean eventually needing none. A person in excellent health could still need some care. This pushes a decreasing amount all the way to zero. It doesn't mistake a requirement for a guarantee in the way the vehicle argument does.
More Parallel Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.