QUESTION TYPE: Parallel Reasoning
CONCLUSION: My manuscript is unlikely to get much attention from publishers.
REASONING: First time authors who aren’t celebrities rarely get much attention for their manuscripts. I am a first time author who isn’t a celebrity.
ANALYSIS: This is a good argument. He might get publicity but probably won’t, based on the experience of authors like him.
There are actually three good arguments on this question so we have to be specific and match the argument exactly.
The stimulus has two conditions (not famous and first time publisher). It also has a premise that allows us to conclude “unlikely” and the argument actually does conclude “unlikely.”
- This is a good argument but the structure is slightly different. The incumbent would have had to have been popular for this to be parallel. (the argument went from unlikely to possible instead of simply concluding unlikely as did the stimulus.)
- CORRECT. This is a good argument. A salad will probably be boring unless a certain thing happens. But that thing didn’t happen. So the salad will likely be boring.
- This is very close, but there is only one condition given: whether zoning is on the agenda. The stimulus and the correct answer have two conditions.
- This is a good argument but it has a different structure. It simply describes what will happen to the estate.
- This is a bad argument. It’s possible that something very abnormal happened this winter.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly