LSAT 120 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q17

LR Question 17 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: People who have never been asked to do more than they can do…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Alex has never been pushed to do all he can.

REASONING: If you’ve never been pushed to do all you can, you’ll never do everything you’re capable of. Alex has not done all that he is capable of.

ANALYSIS: The argument makes an incorrect reversal. Not doing everything you’re capable of is a necessary condition for not having been pushed – the argument takes it to be a sufficient condition.

Maybe Alex is a tiny little baby. There’s an alternate explanation for why he hasn’t achieved his full potential. Bad baby.

___________

1. CORRECT. Has dog ➞ Knows companionship. Alicia knows the value of companionship; therefore she has a dog. As in the stimulus, this argument takes a necessary condition for a sufficient condition.
2. This argument negates the sufficient condition (discovered something new) and then incorrectly negates the necessary condition (examined all possible solutions). This is a flaw, but it is a different flaw (incorrect negation vs. incorrect reversal).
3. This correctly uses contrapositive reasoning. You could argue the conclusion is wrong because there is a middle ground between “not sufficient” and “sufficient.” That would be a different error, however.
4. This is a good argument.
5. This argument stinks, but it’s a different error. It switches from objects one could not afford to lose to objects that John could afford to lose.

Recap: The question begins with “People who have never been asked to do more than they can do”. It is a Flawed Parallel Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Flawed Parallel questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.