Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT138 S3 Q22 Explanation

Radio producer: Our failure

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

Radio producer: Our failure to attract new listeners over the past several years has forced us to choose between devoting some airtime to other, more popular genres of music, and sticking with classical music that appeals only to our small but loyal audience. This audience, however loyal, did not generate enough advertising risk. We should, therefore, devote some airtime to other, more popular genres of music.

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
22.

Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its pattern of reasoning to that used by

Answer choices

  1. Wrong Conclusion15% picked this

    We should either buy blinds for the windows or make full-length curtains. Blinds would be very expensive to purchase. Thus, if cost is our

    The conclusion of this argument is an if/then relationship. The conclusion of the argument in the stimulus is not. For the living room windows, we can make curtains or valances or both. Blinds would be very expensive to purchase. Thus, if cost is our greatest concern, we should make curtains. This argument advocates for one of two options by providing evidence that the other option has a negative consequence that is unacceptable.

  2. Correct51% picked this

    We should either make curtains for the windows or buy blinds. The windows are not standard sizes, so if we buy blinds we will

    Why this is right

    This argument limits the options to two, presents evidence that one option possesses an unacceptable consequence, and then advocates for the other option. The problem with this being that the argument never addressed whether the other option is just as likely to possess the unacceptable consequence. We should either make curtains for the windows or buy blinds. Since the windows are not standard sizes. So if we buy blinds we will have to special order them. We do not have time to wait for special orders. We should make the curtains.

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

  3. Wrong Premise7% picked this

    For the living room windows, we can make curtains or valances or both. We want to have privacy; and while curtains provide privacy, valances

    The evidence in this argument provides support one of the options and against the other option. The argument in the stimulus did not contain evidence agains the other option. For the living room windows, we can make curtains or valances or both. We want to have privacy; and while curtains provide privacy, valances do not. So we should make curtains but not valances.

  4. Wrong Conclusion17% picked this

    Since we have very little fabric, we will have to either buy more, or make valances instead of curtains. However, if we use this

    The conclusion of this argument does not advocate one of the two options presented in the evidence. We have very little fabric. We will have to either buy more, or make valances instead of curtains. If we use this fabric to make valances, then we will have to buy blinds. It would be hard to buy fabric that matches what we already have. We should buy blinds.

  5. Wrong Conclusion10% picked this

    We should either buy blinds or make curtains for the windows. If we buy blinds but do not make valances, the windows will look

    The conclusion of this argument is an if/then relationship. The conclusion of the argument in the stimulus is not. We should either buy blinds or make curtains for the windows. If we buy blinds but do not make valances, the windows will look bare. We should not have bare windows. So if we do not make the curtains, we should make the valances.

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