PrepTest 146

Incorrect. The conclusion of this answer is a conditional statement, so we can rule it out.

Incorrect. The conclusion of this answer is a most statement, so we can rule it out.

Incorrect. The conclusion of this answer is a conditional statement, so we can rule it out.

Incorrect. The structure here is off—at the very least, there's no most OR statement.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Soil-most-Clay
Soil-most-Sand OR Organic material
Therefore: Soil-some-Clay AND Sand; Soil-some-Clay AND Organic material

Answer Anticipation:
This argument has quantifiers all over the place, and it's those quantifiers that define the logic and thus flaw of this argument. It also includes an OR statement in the premises, and a couple AND statements in the conclusion. These also define the logic and thus flaw of this argument!

That's great news—we can use them to eliminate answers! This argument attempts to combine two most statements that share an initial term, which is a valid inference, but it does so by mixing and matching the OR term in the second one. It would be valid to conclude that some soil has both clay and either sand or organic material, but it can't be concluded that some soil exists that has both mixtures.

Hopefully, incorrect answers here will have some quick mismatches we can use to make eliminations!

Answer Explanation:
Pharmacy-most-Shampoo OR Toothpaste
Pharmacy-most-Cosmetics
Therefore: Pharmacy-some-Cosmetics AND Toothpaste; Pharmacy-some-Cosmetics AND Shampoo
Same structure, same flaw.

Key Takeaway:
Quantifiers and AND/OR statements are our friends in Flawed/Parallel Reasoning questions. Defer or eliminate any answer that doesn't match those terms.