Logical reasoning PrepTest 151 · Section 3 · Question 25

Incorrect. This answer relies on past actions to draw a conclusion about the present, not motive.

Incorrect. Both individuals here have a motive; the stimulus featured one person with a motive and the other without.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Only A and B could have done something. A had a reason to, and B did not, so A must have done it.

Answer Anticipation:
This correct answer will bring up two potential options, and give a(n inadequate) reason for picking one over the other, before concluding that option.

Answer Explanation:
Two people, but only one with a motive, so they must have done it. That matches our stimulus exactly.

Key Takeaway:
On the LSAT, motive is frequently relevant. When you see an argument dealing in motive, focus on that.

Incorrect. The stimulus rules one person out because they didn't have a motive to do an action. This answer rules someone out because they had a motive but failed to act on it, so it doesn't parallel the reasoning.

Incorrect. This answer gives positive reasons for selecting its conclusion, and it only mentions facts about one of the two options. Both of those are reasons to eliminate it.