PrepTest 111

Incorrect. This answer brings in an average number, but there's no "average" mentioned in the stimulus. This argument assumes that all numbers are used not that there's a single "master" number behind it all.

Incorrect. This answer could be considered the opposite of the flawed logic in the stimulus in that it invalidly concludes that there are a lot of something instead of a single thing.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Each case of political unrest had a mastermind, so each of them had the same mastermind.

Answer Anticipation:
This question really does come down to reading carefully. The premise here establishes that each case of unrest had a "person or persons" behind it. The conclusion is that the person behind all of the cases was the same. Let's find an answer that similarly establishes something is true of each case in the premise and from that it concludes that the same instance of that thing is true in each case.

Answer Explanation:
This answer goes from each person having a number to that number being the same for everyone. That's the same flaw as going from each case of unrest having a mastermind to the same mastermind being behind all of those cases. This answer is therefore correct.

Key Takeaway:
This is a bit of a weird question and this specific flaw hasn't really shown up much on the LSAT. The takeaway from this then is not to worry if you can't quite describe the flaw as it's unlikely you'll see it again!

Incorrect. This answer addresses hair individually—it's not about always losing the same hair!

Incorrect. This argument doesn't conclude that each moment of Vladimir's life is the same moment, as it would need to to be parallel to the stimulus.