#10 - If Thompson appeals to moderates, his most ardent

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[lsatstudying11]

Hi!

I'm a little unsure why D is wrong. Is it because 'small increase' and 'large increase' are not opposites in the way that 'appeals to moderates' and 'does not appeal to moderates' are? Or, is it because, in the second premise of D, there are two outcomes that necessarily result from the 'large increase' rather than one, which is how many things happen in the stimulus? Thanks so much for your help!

[Frank Peter]

Hi Lsatstudying,

I would say the biggest problem with (D) is that the stimulus is talking about two opposite actions, whereas (D) is talking about the same action. The fact that the large increase in property taxes would yield two outcomes also makes this a less attractive answer choice.

[lounalola]

Why is B the correct answer?

[Jeff Wren]

Hi lounalola,

The argument in the stimulus contains conditional reasoning which should be diagrammed out.

Premise 1: TAM -> ASD + Not WE
(for if Thompson appeals to moderates, then his most ardent supporters will desert him and he will not win election)

Premise 2: Not TAM -> MVO + Not WE
(for if Thompson does Not appeal to moderates, then moderates will vote for his opponent and he will not win election)

Conclusion: TAM or Not TAM -> Not WE
(for Thompson will not win election either way)

Since this is a parallel reasoning question with conditional reasoning, you're looking for an answer that best matches the diagram in the stimulus. In other words, you're looking for an argument that has two premises with opposite sufficient conditions that lead to the same necessary condition. (For example, if A, then B. If not A, then also B. Therefore, either way (A or Not A), B is happening.)

Answer B does this.

Premise 1: CDR -> LNE
(for if company decides to relocate, then it will lose a number of employees)

Premise 2: Not CDR -> LNE
(for if company decides Not to relocate, then it will still lose a number of employees)

Conclusion: CDR or Not CDR -> LNE
(for no matter what it decides (i.e. either way), the company will lose a number of employees

Hopefully, by comparing these two diagrams, you can see that Answer B follows the same reasoning as the argument in the stimulus. Essentially, it's the same argument just with a different topic/subject. It is true that the diagram for Answer B doesn't have two necessary terms in each premise as the stimulus does, but this doesn't really matter as they were not essential to the logic of the argument. The underlying reasoning, that two opposite choices each lead to the same outcome, applies to the stimulus and Answer B.

The other answers are wrong for various reasons. Either the premises or the conclusions do not parallel the ones in the stimulus.