Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT138 S2 Q9 Explanation

A diet whose protein comes

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

TopicsParallel

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

A diet whose protein comes from fish is much healthier than one whose protein comes from red meat. Yet if everyone were to adopt this healthier diet, most of the marine species on which it is based would become extinct, recommend the universal adoption of such a diet.

What this question is testing

Parallel

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
9.

The reasoning in which one of the following arguments most closely resembles that in

Answer choices

  1. Wrong Premise4% picked this

    Some studies have provided evidence that taking a vitamin E supplement every day reduces one's risk of heart attack. However, it has not been

    This argument fails to establish that the advice is good for anyone who would follow it, while in the stimulus it is established that the advice is good for anyone who would follow it.

  2. Wrong Conclusion2% picked this

    Governments are within their rights to tax tobacco heavily and spend this tax revenue on education. If these taxes become too high, however, people

    This argument does not advocate against making a recommendation, but rather suggests that a course of action might need to be replaced in the future.

  3. Correct91% picked this

    A consumer is better off when limiting purchases to what he or she truly needs and saving or investing any remaining income. If everyone

    Why this is right

    This argument matches the reasoning in that it argues against making a recommendation that is good for someone on the basis that if everyone followed the advice it would become untenable.

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

  4. Wrong Conclusion1% picked this

    If legislators spent less time campaigning, they would have more time to do the jobs for which they were elected. But if they did

    This argument does not address the pros and cons of recommending a course of action.

  5. Wrong Conclusion1% picked this

    If we restrict land development in wilderness areas, we help preserve many of the species that now inhabit these areas. But we also thereby

    This argument does not come down strong enough against a recommended course of action.

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