PrepTest 111
[lcid:3542] Prep Test 111 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S3
Logical reasoning
Question prompt
It is inaccurate to
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: D
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Argument or Facts
Argument
Valid or Flawed
Valid
Question Type
Parallel Reasoning Questions
Stimulus Summary
A diet high in sugar can cause someone to be overweight, which is a causal factor in diabetes
Conclusion - It’s wrong to say sugar doesn’t contribute to diabetes
Answer Anticipation
While we’re used to arguments that are based on conditional chains, causal chains are much less common on the exam. However, they provide just as much structure as conditional ones, so this argument’s causal chain should serve as the basis for our approach!
Here, the argument uses two causal premises that chain together to establish it would be wrong to conclude that a certain causal relationship doesn’t exist. We’re looking for something that mirrors that, so we can look for something that takes the form of:
A causes B
B causes C
So - It’s wrong to say that A doesn’t cause C
Answer choices
-
AIt is inaccurate to Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
This argument concludes that it’s wrong to say one thing does cause another, so it’s conclusion doesn’t match up with the stimulus. -
BIt is accurate to Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
This argument concludes that it’s accurate to say something, which means that it’s unlikely to be correct. The conclusion also isn’t causal - another reason to eliminate it. -
CIt is correct to Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
This argument concludes that it’s correct to say that one thing causes another, making it unlikely to be correct. The conclusion is also about the “primary cause” of something, which lends it strength missing from the stimulus. -
DIt is incorrect to Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D matches the stem
The conclusion here matches up with the stimulus, so let’s map this out:
Bad motor oil causes valve deterioration
Valve deterioration causes bad mileage
So it’s wrong to say that bad motor oil can’t cause bad mileage
That’s the same structure as the stimulus, so this is the correct answer. -
EIt is inaccurate to Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
The conclusion here is that it’s wrong to say something is true, which is different from saying that it’s wrong to say something isn’t a cause.
What this tests
Discussion
No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.