Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT15 S2 Q18 Explanation

Everyone who is a gourmet cook

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

Everyone who is a gourmet cook enjoys a wide variety of foods and spices. Since no one who enjoys a wide variety of foods and spices prefers bland foods to all other foods, it follows that all other foods is not a gourmet cook.

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
18.

The pattern of reasoning displayed in the argument above is most similar to that displayed in which one

Answer choices

  1. Bad Evidence Match2% picked this

    All of the paintings in the Huang Collection will be put up for auction next week. Since the paintings to be auctioned next week

    The two premises don't chain together, but even if they did the conclusion is not the contrapositive of that chain. It's actually just the A --> C connection of the chain itself. We know "if in H collection, then auctioned next week" and we know "the auction next week is by a wide variety of artists" but we can't turn that into a conditional, "If a painting is being auctioned next week, then it's by a wide variety of artists". That's basically nonsensical. Each painting is by one artist; the collection of paintings being exhibited is by a wide variety.

  2. Correct73% picked this

    All of the paintings in the Huang Collection are abstract. Since no abstract painting will be included in next week’s art auction, nothing to

    Why this is right

    Answer B is correct.

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

  3. Bad Evidence Match13% picked this

    All of the paintings in the Huang Collection are superb works of art. Since none of the paintings in the Huang Collection is by

    The two premises don't together. They both have the same trigger.

  4. Bad Conclusion Match8% picked this

    Every postimpressionist painting from the Huang Collection will be auctioned off next week. No pop art paintings from the Huang Collection will be auctioned

    The two premises chain together, but the conclusion is not the contrapositive of that chain. It should say, "Hence none of the pop art paintings from the Huang Collection are postimpressionist paintings from the Huang Collection".

  5. Bad Conclusion Match3% picked this

    Every painting from the Huang Collection that is to be auctioned off next week is a major work of art. No price can adequately

    The two premises chain together, but the conclusion is not the contrapositive of that chain. It should say, "Hence any paintings whose value is truly reflected in the auction price is NOT from the Huang Collection".

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