LSAT 6 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q10

LR Question 10 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Anyone who fails to answer a patient’s questions cannot…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: The physician is competent.

REASONING: The physician carefully answers every question. Any physician who doesn’t answer a patient’s questions is a bad physician.

ANALYSIS: This argument mixes up sufficient and necessary. A good physician needs to answer questions. But that’s not enough. For one thing, they should actually know stuff about medicine.

The argument uses this error to make an incorrect negation. No questions bad physician becomes: answers questions good physician.

An incorrect negation is basically the same error as an incorrect reversal. But on a parallel reasoning question they may ask you to distinguish between answer choices which make the two mistakes. (incorrect reversal would be: If you’re a bad physician then you don’t answer questions).

___________

1. This does make a sufficient necessary error. But it makes an incorrect reversal rather than an incorrect negation.
2. This is a good argument. Opposes Ill informed. If that’s true of everyone then it must be true of Jill.
3. Here the two premises contradict each other. One of them must be wrong. This is rare on the LSAT, but it isn’t the error in the stimulus.
4. CORRECT. Two jobs no balance. Not two jobs (Maggie) balance. This is the same error. It incorrectly negates both the sufficient and necessary conditions.
5. This isn’t a good argument. We would have to know that Jeremy is also hot tempered to be sure he wouldn’t succeed. But it isn’t an incorrect negation.

Recap: The question begins with “Anyone who fails to answer a patient’s questions cannot”. It is a Flawed Parallel Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Flawed Parallel questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.