PrepTest 156, Section 2, Question 15
People would not follow a leader if they(27 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(15 more words not shown)
- ABecause people expound(22 more words not shown)
- BBecause there is(23 more words not shown)
- CTo be a(19 more words not shown)
- DBecause people can(19 more words not shown)
- EEven leaders of(21 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Thinking you'll benefit isn't the same as benefiting.
The premise tells us why people would follow a leader: they must believe there's something to gain. That applies even when the leader is incompetent or evil. But the conclusion quietly drops the belief and claims that those followers actually receive some good.
What if they're simply mistaken? A follower could expect a benefit and receive none. The premise would still be true, while the conclusion would fail. We needn't argue about which leaders are evil to see that gap.
What we’re looking for
For the parallel flaw, preserve those roles. An action requires believing something favorable; someone performs the action; the argument treats the favorable belief as reality. Look for that mistake, not merely another argument mentioning bad people or good results.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Expounding a theory takes the place of following a leader. Believing the theory is true takes the place of believing there's something to gain. Then the conclusion moves from that required belief to an actual grain of truth, just as the original moves from expected benefit to actual benefit.
The speaker could believe a theory wholeheartedly while the theory is entirely false. That possibility exposes the same gap: the belief explains the action without guaranteeing that what is believed is true.
- B
The words 'vicious' and 'good' resemble the original's subject matter, but the reasoning doesn't. B starts with a claim that good actually exists even in bad circumstances. It doesn't start with someone's belief and then turn that belief into reality. Matching the topic would miss the mistake.
- C
Here, being a worthy leader requires bringing some good, and the conclusion treats bringing some good as enough to be worthy. A leader might bring one benefit and still fail other requirements for worthiness. That's a different mistake: it turns one requirement into a guarantee. Our argument instead turns a belief into a fact.
- D
This also mentions people's minds and truth, so compare it carefully. It argues that because people can't fully separate truth from wishes, no theory is completely true. That moves from a limitation in people's judgment to a blanket negative verdict on theories.
The original makes the opposite kind of leap: people must believe they'll benefit to follow, so the benefit must exist. D has neither that action-and-required-belief setup nor the positive conclusion that the belief must contain some truth.
- E
This moves from the influence of earlier false theories on scientific leaders to the claim that their influence never disappears completely. We might question whether that influence must persist forever. But there is no step from 'people believe something' to 'that thing is real,' so it doesn't match our flaw.
More Parallel Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.