Logical reasoning PrepTest 115 · Section 4 · Question 26

Incorrect. This answer hops from one option to another, it doesn't do so by ignoring the middle ground. What even would be the middle ground between pepperoni and cheese pizza?

Incorrect. The conclusion here is about one thing being "more likely" than another, but the stimulus definitively states that teaching quality "will surely" deteriorate. Since the certainty doesn't match up, we can eliminate this answer.

Incorrect. Very close! However, the conclusion here is that the society "may" become more discordant (i.e., less harmonious), not that it "will surely" go in that direction. By stating the conclusion as a mere possibility, this answer isn't flawed in the same way as the stimulus (and arguably isn't flawed at all).

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Educational quality won't improve, so it'll go down.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument establishes that something won't increase, and it concludes that it'll therefore decrease. That ignores the middle ground—the quality of teaching might stay the same. Let's find an answer that similarly ignores the middle ground.

Answer Explanation:
This answer ignores the middle ground—temperatures may stay the same. Since it commits the same flaw as the stimulus, it's the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Flawed/Parallel Reasoning questions will frequently have conclusion mismatches with quantifiers, logical force, or certainty. Noting these words/phrases can allow for fairly quick eliminations!

Incorrect. This argument doesn't really have a flaw or, at most, is circular, which isn't the same as the stimulus.