Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT148 S4 Q23 Explanation

YXK is currently the television network

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

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

YXK is currently the television network with the highest overall number of viewers. Among YXK's programs, Bliss has the highest numbers of viewers. So Bliss currently other program on television.

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
23.

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

Answer choices

  1. Correct60% picked this

    Soccer players suffer more leg injuries, on average, than any other athletes at this university. Linda Wilson has suffered more leg injuries than any

    Why this is right

    - We establish that this Whole is #1 overall Soccer Players are #1 overall when it comes to average number of leg injuries. - Then we talk about #1 Part of that Whole Linda (a soccer player) is #1 for leg injuries among soccer players. - Then we conclude that this Part is #1 overall Linda has more leg injuries than anyone This is vulnerable to the same type of objection as was the original argument: even if soccer players on average have more leg injuries than other types of athletes, the #1 person with leg injuries might still be Wobbly Pete, the basketball player.

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

  2. Bad 2nd Premise5% picked this

    Teachers at our school have won more teaching awards, on average, than teachers at any other school in this city. Janna Patel is the

    We're good with the first ingredient - This Whole is #1 overall Our school is #1 when it comes to average number of awards per teacher. But it falls off the rails with the second: - This Part is the #1 within that Whole The second premise doesn't say that Janna is the teacher at this school who is #1 for awards. It actually says that Janna is #1 overall, which is supposed to be the conclusion. The actual conclusion introduces a brand new concept, "Best" vs. "most awards".

  3. Valid Logic29% picked this

    The Olson Motor Company manufactures the three best-selling automobile models in the country. The Decade is the Olson Motor Company's best-selling model. Thus, the

    We're not quite good with the first ingredient - This Whole is #1 overall Olson Motor is #1 when it comes to ... ? It doesn't say that Olson Motor is #1 overall when it comes to a certain metric. Instead, it says that Olson has the top 3 selling car models overall. So when they tell us the Decade is the best of those 3, it's absolute valid to say that the Decade is the #1 car overall.

  4. Bad Premise Matches3% picked this

    In this city the highest-paid police officer earns more than the highest-paid firefighter, and the lowest-paid police officer earns more than the lowest-paid firefighter.

    We don't have our desired first ingredient, - This Whole is #1 overall The premises aren't about a Whole at all. It just says the #1 cop makes more money than the #1 firefighter, and the lowest cop makes more than the lowest firefighter. We can bail. If we don't have a premise about a Whole, then we can't match this up with the original

  5. Valid Logic3% picked this

    Falling Fast is the film that is currently earning the most at the box office in the country. The most successful film in the

    We don't get our needed first ingredient - This Whole is #1 overall Instead, the premise is about an individual film. It's the #1 overall. Furthermore, this argument is actually fine. We're allowed to argue like this: - Thing X is A - Most things that are A are B. - Thus, Thing X is probably B.

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