QUESTION TEXT: No one wants this job as much as Joshua does, but he is…
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning
CONCLUSION: No one will apply for the job, no matter how high the salary is.
REASONING: Joshua wants it the most, but he isn’t applying.
ANALYSIS: This is a bad argument. Maybe the job is in another city, and Joshua can’t move there for family reasons. Someone else might apply.
Abstractly, the flaw is: Just because the most likely candidate won’t do something, doesn’t mean that no one will do that thing.
___________
- This is a bad argument, but it’s a different flaw: it only mentions one person. The argument is bad because Beth might still have made a mistake.
- This is a good argument. The best candidate is disqualified, but the author is aware we might be able to find someone else.
- CORRECT. This repeats the flaw. There might be someone else interested, even if the most likely candidate isn’t buying for some reason.
- This is a plausible argument. If it was the same as the stimulus, the argument would have said: “and therefore no one will bid.”
- This is a bad argument, but the flaw is different. The argument is bad because there’s no evidence that Paul’s seniority was the reason he was needed at the factory.
Recap: The question begins with “No one wants this job as much as Joshua does, but he is”. It is a Flawed Parallel Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Flawed Parallel questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.
Leave a Reply