Logical Reasoning

PT130 · S4 · Q22 A book tour will be successful

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

Start practicing free

A book tour will be successful if it is well publicized and the author is an established writer.

Conclusion

Julia's book tour must have been well publicized

Evidence

If a book tour is well publicized and involves an established writer, it will be successful. Julia is an established writer. The book tour was successful.

Evaluation

Since this involves conditional logic, it is probably advisable to diagram its structure, so that finding mismatches will be easier. Premise 1: A and B → C (a conditional with two things on the left) Premise 2: B is true. Premise 3: C is true. Conclusion: Thus, A must be true.

Conversationally, we would say that the flaw is failing to consider that a book tour doesn't NEED those two components to be successful. The combo of famous writer / well publicized is guaranteed to be successful, but there's still room for tours that are famous writer / poorly promoted, unknown writer / well promoted, and unknown writer / poorly promoted to succeed.

Goal

Scan initially for a conditional premise, with an "and" in the trigger. Look for premises that factually assert half of the trigger and the consequence. Then look for a conclusion that factually asserts the other half of the trigger.

22.

Which one of the following exhibits a pattern of flawed reasoning most closely parallel to the pattern of flawed reasoning exhibited by the argument above?

  1. This recipe will turn out

    Bad Premise Match

    No need to read past the first sentence. It gives us a conditional that says: "Recipe turns out → Exactly Followed and Good Ingredients" But we needed the "and" on the left side.

    23% picked this

  2. If a computer has the

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This gives us a conditional premise with an "and" in the trigger. And it gives us the consequence as a factual premise. But it puts both trigger facts into the conclusion. One of them was supposed to be a premise.

    3% picked this

  3. Correct

    If cacti are kept in

    Why this is right

    Kept in Shade and Watered 2 Much → Die Kept in Shade. Died. Thus, must have been Watered 2 Much.

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

    69% picked this

  4. A house will suffer from

    Trap

    Bad Premise/Conclusion Match Not a Flaw This gives us a conditional with 2 things in the trigger. Then it gives us both trigger ideas as facts. Then it concludes the consequence. So it's just valid logic.

    2% picked this

  5. If one wears a suit

    Trap

    Bad Premise/Conclusion Match Not a Flaw This gives us a conditional with 2 things in the trigger. Then it gives us both trigger ideas as facts. Then it concludes the consequence. So it's just valid logic, exactly like choice (D).

    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.

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