Logical reasoning PrepTest 153 · Section 2 · Question 25

Incorrect. This isn't right. He believes extinctions will occur, therefore, he believes extinctions will occur? There's also an additional "might," which doesn't match the quantification in the stimulus.

Incorrect. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Katelin thinks there's a blizzard coming. Therefore, she probably thinks the car show tomorrow is canceled. In the event of a blizzard, the car show will not be held.

Answer Anticipation:
Watch how this sneaky stimulus jumps from Katelin's belief to an absolute. We don't know if she's aware that the car show won't go forward in snowy weather. We don't know if she even thinks about the car show at all! Our correct parallel flaw will have the same problem, using definitive information about an event to draw an unsubstantiated conclusion about a belief. Watch the "probably" quantification, too. You need that to match in the parallel.

Answer Explanation:
Ah, this works nicely! Again, the flaw is that we're making a conclusion about Bo's beliefs from some kind of objective rule that Bo may or may not be aware of. Bo might not know anything at all about raspberry bushes. Bo might just never consider the idea of raspberry bushes in their yard.

Key Takeaway:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning questions require great discipline to avoid picking a flawed argument that is almost the same but different in a crucial respect. Anticipate as much as possible to avoid traps!

Incorrect. This is still flawed, but not quite as flawed as the stimulus. The flaw here isn't jumping from objective rules to beliefs and back, as in the stimulus. It's presumptuous about Wanda's beliefs, but at least that's based on understanding what people with her beliefs tend to think.

Incorrect. First dealbreaker that jumps out: "might believe" Nobody might believes in the stimulus. The logical force is all wrong, so this is the wrong answer.

Incorrect. This is a fallacy of the converse, not an issue with belief vs. reality.