Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT154 S4 Q7 ExplanationLate blight is a disease

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

Late blight is a disease affecting tomato plants that causes blue-grey patches to appear on the leaves. Applying a copper solution to the blighted plants is an effective treatment for the disease. Therefore, late blight of copper in the plant’s mineral intake.

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
7.

The flawed nature of the argument can be most effectively demonstrated by noting that, by parallel reasoning, we

Answer choices, explained

  1. Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

    since radiation therapy can be an effective treatment for some types of cancer, it follows that higher doses of radiation will be more effective

    The conclusion of the original argument doesn't claim that higher doses of copper solution would be more effective in treating late blight. The conclusion in this answer choice doesn't involve the same flaw of favoring one explanation when others are just as plausible.

  2. Bad Evidence Match Bad Conclusion Match3% picked this

    since scurvy is caused by a deficiency of vitamin C, it follows that vitamin C is an

    This wouldn't be a terrible answer, except the premise and conclusion are completely reversed. It would be similar to the original argument if it read, "since vitamin C is an effective treatment for scurvy, it follows that scurvy is caused by a deficiency of vitamin C."

  3. Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

    since malnutrition can cause health problems, it follows that the more food you eat, the

    This is similar to answer choice A. The original argument does not claim that, because something is effective, even more of that thing is more effective.

  4. Correct93% picked this

    since paracetamol is effective in treating headaches, it follows that headaches are caused by a lack of

    Why this is right

    This describes the same type of situation as the original argument. If we replace "paracetamol" with "copper," replace "headaches" with "late blight," and replace "bloodstream" with "mineral intake," we basically have the same argument with the same flaw.

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

  5. Bad Evidence Match Bad Conclusion Match2% picked this

    since calcium deficiency in apple trees causes brown spots on the apples, it follows that apple trees growing in soils that are rich in

    This is similar to answer choice B in that this reverses the premise and conclusion. The conclusion of the original argument claims that X causes Y, while that is stated as the evidence in this answer choice.

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