Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT126 S1 Q1 Explanation

The editor of a magazine

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsParallel Flaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

The editor of a magazine has pointed out several errors of spelling and grammar committed on a recent TV program. But she can hardly be trusted to pass judgment on been found in her own magazine.

What this question is testing

Parallel Flaw

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
1.

The flawed reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one

Answer choices

  1. Bad Premise Match3% picked this

    Your newspaper cannot be trusted with the prerogative to criticize the ethics of our company: you

    This isn’t about similar past behavior. “Can’t judge ethics if you misspelled someone’s name” is a different type of disconnect.

  2. Correct95% picked this

    Your news program cannot be trusted to judge our hiring practices as unfair: you yourselves unfairly discriminate in

    Why this is right

    We can’t listen to you when it comes to saying that our hiring is unfair, because in the past you have done unfair hiring.

    Skill tested: Parallel Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  3. Bad Premise Match0% picked this

    Your regulatory agency cannot condemn our product as unsafe: selling it is allowed under an

    The matching premise would have been, “After all, in the past, this regulatory agency was guilty of unsafe products.”

  4. Bad Premise Match1% picked this

    Your coach cannot be trusted to judge our swimming practices: he accepted a lucrative promotional deal

    The matching premise would have been, “After all, in the past, this coach was guilty of bad swimming practices.”

  5. Bad Conclusion Match / Bad Premise Match0% picked this

    Your teen magazine should not run this feature on problems afflicting modern high schools: your revenue depends on not

    The conclusion isn’t invalidating someone, it’s just suggesting that we not take a course of action. And its evidence doesn’t point out past bad behavior.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

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.

Start practicing free