LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 8950
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#23231
Complete Question Explanation

Parallel Reasoning-CE. The correct answer choice is (A)

This argument follows a classic cause-and-effect paradigm: just because two occurrences are correlated (studying music and being proficient in math), that does not mean that one necessarily causes the other. It is equally plausible that both share a common cause (such as growing up in a family that encourages intellectual and artistic pursuits).

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. Just as in the stimulus, we are dealing with a correlation — this time between failing to pay attention and performing poorly in school. In both arguments we are warned against inferring a cause-and-effect relationship between the two, as it is always possible that a third factor (undiagnosed hearing problems in this case) can be the common cause for both.

Answer choice (B): There is no element of common cause that might be responsible for two occurrences that are correlated. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): While this answer choice is similar to the stimulus in that they both question the validity of a certain causal relationship (consuming vegetables does not necessarily prevent heart disease, just as studying music does not necessarily improve one's ability to do math), the author does not speculate as to what might be the common cause that explains the correlation. Because this element was crucial to the argument contained in the stimulus, this answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (D): This answer choice merely suggests that two required conditions for becoming a physician (studying biology and chemistry) should not be thought of as sufficient for one's success a physician.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice may seem tempting at first, since vigorous exercise does not necessarily make you healthy, just as studying music does not necessarily make you better at math. However, the parallel ends here. We have no reason to suspect, for instance, that the correlation between vigorous exercise and health can be explained by a common cause. Instead, we are simply told that vigorous exercise may not be all that necessary in the end, since it is possible that exercise that is even less vigorous also has beneficial effects. This would be like saying that studying music does not necessarily make you better at math, because merely listening to music may sometimes be enough. This answer choice is therefore incorrect.
 sgd2114
  • Posts: 23
  • Joined: Jul 14, 2017
|
#37445
Hi,

I see now why answer (A) is correct. However, when attacking the answer choices I quickly killed (A) using the conclusion test because the stimulus says "it cannot be concluded" and (A) says "it should not necessarily be thought that..." I reasoned that the level of certainty was different between the two.

After thinking about it, is "cannot be concluded" more a statement of "not necessarily true" / "could be false" rather than something like "cannot be true" / "must be false"?

Thank you.
User avatar
 Dave Killoran
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5981
  • Joined: Mar 25, 2011
|
#37582
Yes, exactly. "It cannot be concluded" is like saying, "it's not certain." That is right in the "not necessarily" classification as far as truth.

Nice work!
 cindyhylee87
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: May 21, 2017
|
#38528
Hi,

I chose (B) and afterward I felt (B) was wrong. However, I am a little bit confused by the wording of answer choice (B). Could you please break it down and analyze for me?

Thanks,
Cindy
 nicholaspavic
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 271
  • Joined: Jun 12, 2017
|
#38804
Hi Cindy,

Answer Option (B) takes its explanation a step further than what is proposed in the stimulus. Here the "common cause" described above in the original explanation is that parents are guiding kids to mathematics and music. There is no such common cause and effect described in Answer Choice (B). In fact, the evaluation standards spoke of are not common and the answer suggests that they may be mutually exclusive. In other words, if a student does well by standards in Guatemala, that statndard may not equal the same standard that is applied here in the United States. So the two different standards are not the common cause like the parents are in the stimulus. Thanks for the great question!
User avatar
 rachel_fs03
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: Jan 29, 2024
|
#107809
Hi,

This question tripped me up because the stimulus uses the words "equally likely" when discussing the possibility that being good at music and being good at math have the same cause. I was looking for an answer choice that has that same strength, but none of them seem to. While A, B, and E discuss a possibility, they do not say that it is equally as likely. So
they all felt wrong because a possibility means >0%, while the stimulus said that the alternative explanation had a 50% chance of being correct. Am I being too stringent here in demanding the strength of the conclusion be exactly the same? And going forward, how do you suggest I can avoid being too rigid in this way?

Thanks!
User avatar
 Dana D
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 385
  • Joined: Feb 06, 2024
|
#107973
Hey Rachel,

In parallel questions, we want to focus on the general structure of the argument and conclusion. Here, 'equally likely' is important, but not necessarily in the way you keyed in.

The stimulus says, in abstract terms, that just because someone is good at 2 things doesn't mean we should assume one caused the other, because there may be a 3rd factor that caused both. The "may" here is the same as the "equally likely" - there is a possibility that there is a 3rd causal factor for both traits.

If you narrowed this down to 2 answer choices that perfectly mirrored this stimulus and the only difference between them was that one answer choice mentioned a 50/50 probability while the other said 'may' or 'might' then sure, the phrase 'equally likely' is critical to narrow in on. However, looking at answer choices (A), (B) and (E), there are other issues with (B) and (E) that will let you eliminate them.

Look at the complete question explanation for answer choices (B) and (E) - they are easily eliminated because they don't match the overall structure of the stimulus at all - we don't even need to debate the language of 'equally likely' here. So to answer your last question, moving forward I would focus primarily on the argument structure for parallel questions and then if you're picking between two answer choices that BOTH match the structure, the dealbreaker between answers could come down to specificity in probability, or the difference between saying 'some' versus 'most', for example.

Hope that helps!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.