Logical reasoning PrepTest 110 · Section 3 · Question 23

Incorrect. The conclusion here is about what can't be proven, not what is true. That shift in language is enough to invalidate this answer, as it's dealing with different logic.

Incorrect. The opening line here compares two sets of ecosystems—a comparison that's missing from the stimulus. As such, this answer has different underlying logic and can be eliminated.

Incorrect. This answer features a bad generalization or part to whole flaw, concluding what is true of all arthropods (the whole) based on what is true of a subset of them (insects).

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Society where financial terms define value → Fragment
Nonindustrial societies — not Society where financial terms define value
Therefore — Nonindustrial societies tend to stay unified (not Fragment)

Answer Anticipation:
When a Flawed Parallel Reasoning question features conditional logic, it becomes a lot easier to find the correct answer by matching up the conditional elements. In this stimulus, though, it's a little harder to see that it's conditional. There is an indicator word, but it's a less common one—"invariably." If one thing "invariably" leads to another then the outcome is guaranteed and thus it can be diagrammed as a conditional.

With that diagrammed we can see that this argument attempts to apply the conditional to a specific case but in doing so it commits an illegal negation. The specific case fails to meet the sufficient condition and it then concludes that the case fails to meet the necessary. Let's find an answer that similarly takes the form:
A → B
not A
Therefore — Tend to not B

Answer Explanation:
Poets convey their thoughts via nonliteral language. Journalists aren't poets. Thus journalists don't convey their thoughts via nonliteral language. That's the same illegal negation as in the stimulus so even though the strength of some of the statements is off it still has the same flawed pattern of reasoning so this is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
It's very rare for a Flawed Parallel Reasoning question that has a conditional logic flaw to have a correct answer that isn't purely conditional so don't expect to see an answer similar to (D) on your test. However be aware that this has happened a handful of times on the exam (mostly on older tests) and if you've eliminated all answers in this question type because of language like we saw in (D) head back to see if ignoring that language the pattern of reasoning matches up.

Incorrect. The opening line here, much like (B), contains a comparison that isn't present in the stimulus, so we can rule this answer out.