A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.
Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests
Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.
Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.
Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.
Miller's questionable reasoning in which one of the following dialogues is most closely parallel to Miller's questionable reasoning in the dialogue above?
Wu: We should not go
Miller: Yes, we should. Food
Why this is right
Answer A is correct.
Skill tested: Parallel Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
66% picked this
Wu: Bailey should not be
Miller: Yes, he should. Aggressive
27% picked this
Wu: We should not paint
Miller: Yes, we should. Bright
2% picked this
Wu: We should not upgrade
Miller: Yes, we should. The
2% picked this
Wu: This job applicant should
Miller: No, we should hire
3% picked this
Continue the review in LSAT Lab
Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.
Turn this review into a targeted study plan.
Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.