Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT6 S3 Q10 Explanation

Anyone who fails to answer

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

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

Anyone who fails to answer a patient’s questions cannot be a competent physician. That is why I feel confident about my physician’s competence: she carefully answers no matter how trivial.

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
10.

Which one of the following most closely parallels the flawed reasoning in

Answer choices

  1. Bad Conclusion Match12% picked this

    Anyone who grows up in a large family is accustomed to making compromises. Meredith is accustomed to making compromises, so she might have

    The weaker strength of this conclusion, "She might have grown up in a large family" makes it a non-starter. As it turns out were we to look closer, the argument is making more of a Reversal than a Negation.

  2. Valid Logic14% picked this

    Anyone who is not in favor of this proposal is ill informed on the issue. Jeanne opposes the proposal, so she is

    This supplies a conditional, not in favor ? ill informed Then it tells us "J is not in favor, she opposes it", which allows them to validly conclude "J is ill informed".

  3. Wrong Flaw: Self-Contradiction2% picked this

    No one who likes music misses a performance of the symphony. Paul likes music, yet last week he missed

    This answer weirdly just contradicts itself. The original argument made an illegal leap with conditional logic, but it didn't contradict itself. ORIGINAL: If X, then Y. C is not X, so C is not Y. THIS ANSWER: If X, then Y. C is X but not Y.

  4. Correct69% picked this

    Anyone who works two or more jobs is unable to find a balance between professional and personal life. Maggie has only one job, so

    Why this is right

    This performs an illegal negation: If X, then Y Work 2 jobs ? unable to find balance Thing A is not X. Maggie does not work 2 jobs. Therefore, Thing A is not Y. Maggie is able to find balance.

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

  5. Wrong Flaw: Not Fully Triggered3% picked this

    No one who is hot-tempered and strong-willed will succeed in this business. Jeremy is strong-willed, so he will

    The flaw here is that there are two conditions needed to trigger this rule, and the argument only supplies one of those two conditions. There's no negation or reversal happening though. ORIGINAL If X, then Y. J is not X. Thus, J is not Y. THIS ANSWER If X and Y, then not Z. J is Y. Thus, J is not Z.

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