Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT145 S4 Q23 Explanation

For a computer to be intelligent

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

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

For a computer to be intelligent, it must possess at least one of three qualities: creativity, self-awareness, or the ability to learn from its mistakes. Because the AR3000 is not creative or self-aware, it from its mistakes if it is intelligent.

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
23.

Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to

Answer choices

  1. Bad Conclusion Match7% picked this

    Every vaccine is either an attenuated-virus vaccine, a dead-virus vaccine, or a pure DNA vaccine. Vaccine X cannot fall into the last two categories,

    This does provide a conditional with an "at least one of these options" outcome. Vaccine → attenuated-virus, dead-virus vaccine, or pure DNA We now need a premise that rules out two of these categories for Thing X, and then a conditional conclusion that says "If thing X is a vaccine, then it must be that last option". But this conclusion is not a conditional. We already know it's a vaccine. In the original, we heard that "at least one of these options" must be true for Intelligence, but we didn't ever know that AR3000 was intelligent.

  2. Correct78% picked this

    Every commonly used vaccine is either a dead-virus vaccine, an attenuated-virus vaccine, or a pure DNA vaccine. Vaccine X is not a dead-or attenuated-virus

    Why this is right

    This has a conditional premise with a set of "at least one must be true" options. Common → attenuated-virus , dead-virus vaccine , or pure DNA Used vaccine We now need a premise that rules out two of these categories for vaccine X, and then a conditional conclusion that says "If vaccine X is a commonly used vaccine, then it must be that last option". The second premise says Vaccine X is not dead-virus and not attenuated-virus. The conclusion is indeed conditional and says, Vaccine X is commonly used vaccine → pure DNA.

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

  3. Missing 2nd Premise9% picked this

    Every vaccine is either a dead-virus vaccine, an attenuated-virus vaccine, or a pure DNA vaccine. Thus, if vaccine X is not a dead-or attenuated-virus

    This only has one premise, so it's not going to be able to match the original. We needed one premise that says "to be ___ , you got to be at least one of these three things" and then a second premise that said, "but thing X isn't two of those".

  4. Bad Premise / Conclusion Match2% picked this

    Every commonly used vaccine is either a dead-virus vaccine, an attenuated-virus vaccine, or a pure DNA vaccine. Vaccine X stimulates the production of killer

    Original argument This answer P1. X → A or B or C X → A or B or C P2. Thing Y isn't Thing Y does something A or B that shows not A. C. If thing Y is X, If thing Y is not B, then must be C then must be C

  5. Bad Premise / Conclusion Match4% picked this

    Every commonly used vaccine is either a dead-virus vaccine, an attenuated-virus vaccine, or a pure DNA vaccine. Because vaccine X is not an attenuated-virus

    Original argument This answer P1. X → A or B or C X → A or B or C P2. Thing Y isn't Thing Y is not B A or B C. If thing Y is X, If thing Y is not A, then must be C then must be C

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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