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
|
#27206
Complete Question Explanation

Parallel Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (C)

Many physicists have devoted their entire careers to the search for a Grand Unifying Theory (GUT) or Theory Of Everything (TOE). Some even hope to find a single formula that would explain everything from molecular bonding to black holes. Of course, other scientists believe that no such theory or formula exists.

This stimulus suggests that past results are a reliable indicator of future events. Since every theory in the past has been rejected as incomplete, then any current physical theory, including quantum mechanics, will eventually be rejected as well. The correct answer choice must draw a similar conclusion on the basis of similar reasoning. It will demonstrate that some anticipated future result will not occur because it has never occurred in the past.

Answer choice (A): This argument concludes that the conditions which affect one group may have a similar effect on another group. A more parallel argument would be: Since only a few species of animals have ever lived in very dry climates, many species of animals do not live in those climates now.

Answer choice (B): This is actually an Opposite argument. According to this argument, the fifth company will not be able to market a product because several other companies have already done so. The stimulus argues that quantum mechanics will not be able to explain every phenomenon because no other theory has ever done so.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. Just as quantum mechanics will not be the final theory because every previous theory has not been final, your sister will not win this chess tournament because she has not won every previous chess tournament. Both this answer and the stimulus overlook the fact that the first time anything occurs, it is always different from every previous occurrence.

Answer choice (D): Rather than inferring that something will not happen because it has never happened before, this answer infers that something will not happen because it has happened once before.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice is incorrect because it is based on the mistaken assumption that what is true about each member of a group must also be true of the group as a whole. The argument would be more parallel if it said: Every previous team has failed to live up to people’s expectations; therefore, this team will not live to people’s expectations.
 Shaela L. Hayes
  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: Jun 01, 2021
|
#87522
Can you please explain how the beginning of the conclusion—"we can expect"—doesn't change the degree? When I saw this wording, I immediately thought the conclusion fell under the degree of possibility because of the word "can". I know from the correct answer now that the conclusion matches the degree of certainty, but I thought for it to fall under this category the conclusion would have had to omit "we can expect" and instead state "For this reason, quantum mechanics will not be the final theory."

Thanks!
User avatar
 Ryan Twomey
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 141
  • Joined: Mar 04, 2021
|
#87544
Hey Shaela,

So, the first step in parallel reasoning problems is to parallel the reasoning. That is what the testmakers consider to be the most important aspect in choosing the correct answer choice in a parallel reasoning question.

The reasoning in this problem can be boiled down essentially to: 'what has happened in the past will continue to happen in the future.'

There is only one answer choice that has this type of reasoning, and that is answer choice C. This makes answer choice C the correct answer choice without considering the specific language.

You only want to start considering the strength of language after you have applied the reasoning test first, or else you risk eliminating the correct answer. Strength of language in the conclusion can be applied if there are two answer choices that match the pattern of reasoning in the stimulus.

You can apply the steps in this order to avoid making a mistake:

1. Parallel the reasoning (boil down the stimulus and make sure the correct answer choice matches)
2. Parallel the validity (if the stimulus is valid, correct answer choice must be valid. Same goes for invalid to invalid.)
3. Match the language in the conclusion
4. Match the language in the premises

Often times, step 1 is the only step required to eliminate four answer choices. Sometimes step 1 only eliminates 2 answer choices. But the testmakers do think that step 1 is more of a dealbreaker than step 3 and step 4.

I hope this helps, and I wish you all of the luck in your studies.

Best,
Ryan
 Shaela L. Hayes
  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: Jun 01, 2021
|
#87569
Thank you, Ryan!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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