#27 - Parallel

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=14217)

The correct answer choice is (B)

This question asks for the process most analogous to the thistle-curtailing process described in
the last paragraph; a mix of native grass and herb species added to plots appeared to force out the
thistles.

Answer choice (A): This choice lacks the concept of bringing in something to keep something else
out, so it does not parallel the process described in the last paragraph.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. Like the native species supported to force
out the thistles in the Netherlands study, this choice describes the approach of supporting rival
candidates to take over the local area and keep Party A’s representation from proliferating.

Answer choice (C): This choice does not parallel the process referenced in the passage, which brings
in some species to force out others.

Answer choice (D): This choice describes a more direct attack on supporters of passage A, but does
not include the concept of bringing in certain species to crowd out others, so this answer fails to
parallel the process described in the third paragraph and should be ruled out of contention.

Answer choice (E): This choice deals with creation of antagonism between the parties, but it does
not parallel the process outlines in the third paragraph, in which thistles appeared to have been
crowded out of plots where diverse native species of grass and herbs were introduced.

[Rita]

Hi, could you explain why B is a better choice than A? I assumed that the process by which the spread of thistles can be curtailed refers to sowing beneficial microorganisms and a wide variety of plant seeds into the soil (i.e. increasing diversity). Both A and B seemed to increase diversity in the election by strengthening a rival party, thereby curtailing the spread of Party A. I don't see why defending candidates from the rival party (B) is more analogous to the passage than encouraging Party A supporters to support the rival party (A).

Thanks,
Rita

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Hi Rita,

Great question. This one seems very odd at first read (and second read, also!), and picking between A and B can be tricky. The key here is thinking about the process of removing the thistles; the passage describes this as occurring by defending the other plants, rather than attacking the thistles. A would be equivalent to trying to take nutrients away from the thistles, which isn't what the passage describes. B, on the other hand, describes challenging Party A by defending the other party, or rival. Party A is analogous to the thistles, and the rival is analogous to the good plants; the defending in terms of the passage is the use of beneficial microorganisms, while the defending in B is protecting the other party.

Hopefully that helps! This is such a confusing one, so I'm glad you're thinking it through!

[Rita]

Hi Emily,

That's really helpful, thank you!

[jwheeler]

Can you point out where in the last paragraph the method of curtailing the spread of thistles is? I feel like that's more explicitly mentioned in paragraph 2, but the question stem refers me to the last paragraph. I had a hard time figuring out what I should be paralleling because I couldn't find the argument as clearly stated in the 3rd paragraph. Thanks!

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Jwheeler,

Good question! Part of the difficulty with this question is that the third paragraph continues the conversation and discussion from the second, but without using some of the terms you might expect to see. For example, though the second paragraph talks a lot about thistles, we don't see them mentioned as much in the third. That doesn't end our inquiry though---really the process of clearing and reclaiming the land is all about reclaiming the land from the thistles. The third paragraph talks about increasing diversity below ground to increase diversity above ground---that is to increase the types of plants grown and remove useless weeds/thistles.

Hope that helps!
Rachael

[Katherinthesky]

Hello,

I was thrown off the analogy in (B) by "certain broadcast journalists" - what do they represent?

Thanks in advance

[Adam Tyson]

Good question, Katherinthesky! In correct answer B, the broadcast journalists are meant to substitute for the aggressive disease organisms, against which the newspaper, like the beneficial microorganisms, provide a defense. Gosh, I wonder if someone at LSAC was trying to subtly share their opinion about certain broadcast journalists when they drew that analogy!

The analogy needs to capture the idea that something beneficial is being introduced to defend against something harmful. Diseases are harmful in the stimulus, while certain broadcast journalists are harmful in the analogy.

[Tajadas]

Hi,

I agree with everything that Rachael Wilkenfeld said about more diversity=good, but I still don't really understand how we were supposed to connect that with the thistle problem. Because thistles are only heavily discussed in paragraph 2, I took thistles to be a secondary part of the article and as more of a symptom of the problem than a problem in itself. For that reason, when the question stem referred to thistles in paragraph 3, it threw me for a loop. I thought paragraph 3 was about promoting better soil development and not about thistles.

What are key indicators that I could have read in paragraph 3 that would have connected paragraph 3 back to the idea of crowding out thistles? I can't find any. To me, the answer to this question was in paragraph 2; the RC Bible warned me to beware of the LSAT misdirecting readers on local knowledge questions, but it's only clear to me that that's what the LSAT was doing in hindsight.

[Albertlyu]

the question stem is misleading, the thistles and how to deter them was not discussed in P3, instead, it is in P2.

the takeaway for the parallel from the passage is simple: fight against something harm by bringing in more varieties.