PrepTest 159, Section 1, Question 23
During last year's flu season no one who(32 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(11 more words not shown)
- ANo camper who(28 more words not shown)
- BLast year, Marie(29 more words not shown)
- CLast year, no(27 more words not shown)
- DAll the fruit(24 more words not shown)
- ENo sparrow eats(22 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Last year isn't this year. What if the conditions change?
No vaccinated person contracted the flu last season. That might reflect effective protection, but the observation alone doesn't establish what will happen every future year. Perhaps those people encountered little flu last year. Or perhaps this year's flu strain is different and the vaccination doesn't protect against it. Those are possibilities to test the prediction, not facts we're adding to the passage.
The argument takes the old pattern, notes that every South High student meets the vaccination condition now, and carries the old outcome forward: none will get the flu this season. For the parallel question, preserve that time shift. We need a condition associated with avoiding a bad outcome in an earlier period, a group meeting that condition now, and a prediction that the group will avoid the outcome now too.
What we’re looking for
The stem asks for similar reasoning, so match the reasoning we actually have. We don't need to treat the argument as flawless just because the question doesn't call it a flaw.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Insect repellent takes the place of vaccination; being disturbed by mosquitoes takes the place of contracting the flu. Last month supplies the past observation, and tonight supplies the new occasion. Everyone at the campsite has used the protective measure, so the argument predicts that nobody there will suffer the bad outcome.
The switch from a month to a night might initially look different from a year-to-year comparison. But the lengths of the periods don't do the reasoning. Both arguments assume that the earlier relationship will carry over to the later occasion. That's the relevant match.
- B
Buying a well-maintained car last year doesn't supply the original's general past pattern. We aren't told that no maintained cars had problems last year and then given a new set of maintained cars this year. Instead, the same car will continue receiving maintenance, and the conclusion predicts it is unlikely to have problems. That differs from applying a prior universal outcome to a newly described group.
- C
Everything remains within last year. The rule says students with perfect attendance didn't fail, and the advanced-history students had perfect attendance then. Applying that rule to those students doesn't carry a result from one period into a new period. It lacks the original's central time shift.
- D
The fruit bought yesterday is one group; all fruit in the refrigerator is potentially a larger group. There could be older fruit in the refrigerator too. The conclusion extends a description of the purchased fruit to everything in the fridge. That group-coverage problem is different from predicting a repeat of last year's outcome under this year's conditions.
- E
This applies a rule about all hard-shelled seeds to the seeds of a particular tree. Nothing limits the rule to a previous season and then assumes it will continue in a new one. The tree's seeds meet the stated condition, so they fall directly under the rule. There is no matching past-to-present move.
More Parallel Reasoning questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Reasoning questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.