LR Question 22 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: Radio producer: Our failure to attract new listeners…
QUESTION TYPE: Parallel Reasoning
CONCLUSION: We should play more popular music.
REASONING: We can either play more popular music or go out of business. We shouldn’t go out of business.
ANALYSIS: This argument presents two possibilities and argues that one is unacceptable. Therefore we should choose the other.
This isn’t technically a good argument. It could be that both possibilities are unacceptable, and one is less unacceptable than others.
But it’s a pretty good argument, because it’s implied that playing popular music is less unacceptable.
Parallel reasoning questions are long. Several of the answers are structurally different from the stimulus. You can eliminate those first. Anything with three elements or more than two choices is out.
___________
- We don’t know if cost is the greatest concern. This isn’t as clear cut as the stimulus.
- CORRECT. This argument chooses one possibility by showing that another is unacceptable. It repeats the error from the stimulus: the argument hasn’t shown that we can make curtains fast enough. Maybe neither option is acceptable. However, it’s implied that curtain can be made faster.
- This makes a different flaw. It’s possible that curtains could provide privacy, but valences could be used at the same time for other benefits. The structure is different, the stimulus didn’t say we could choose both options.
- This is a complex argument. That alone should tell you that it’s incorrect. The stimulus had a simple structure.
- This introduces far too many elements to parallel the stimulus.
More Resources for Parallel Reasoning Questions
- Conditional Reasoning Article: Learn about conditional statements.
- LR Diagrams Guide: Learn how to draw LR diagrams.
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Parallel Reasoning questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers parallel reasoning questions.
I chose E, and am a little unclear on the justification given for why it is incorrect. In my reading of E, the elements are blinds, curtains, and bare. In the correct answer, the elements are curtains, blinds, standard sizes, and order time. I thought B included too many elements and eliminated it, but I am still unsure about what extra elements were introduced in E that caused its exclusion.
The stimulus gives us an either/or option, and draws a conclusion about which of the two options the radio station should proceed with. (E) gives us an either/or option, but look at the difference between the conclusion and the options we’re given. Rather than drawing a conclusion about whether blinds should be purchased or curtains should be made, the stimulus introduces a new element, valances.
In eliminating answer choice C, you note that the stimulus does not say we can choose both options; however, in the final sentence of the stimulus it says “devote some time” – implying that some time will be used for popular music and some will be used for classical.
Furthermore, if answer choice B is to be fully parallel, it should state we should make curtains or make none, that is really the choice presented (some airtime to popular music or none).
As you can probably guess, I was drawn to C and while I realize B is the better answer now, I’m curious what you think of my comments.
By “both options” I meant the choice between devoting some time to popular music vs. staying exclusively classical. C is opting to pick both options, which is logically impossible in the stimulus.
You’re viewing it wrong by focussing on some music vs. none. You should view this as: option 1 or option 2, which is an abstract form that can generalize to all the arguments.