LR Question 22 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: The writers of the television show Ambitions could make…
QUESTION TYPE: Parallel Reasoning
CONCLUSION: The characters will not be developed in a more realistic manner.
REASONING: The writers want to maximize their audience, and making realistic characters will shrink their viewership.
ANALYSIS:
The argument hare follows this structure:
- If X, then Y.
- But Y is not true, so X is not true.
We will hunt for an answer that matches this format. We specifically need the necessary condition (Y) to be untrue, and for the conclusion to be that the sufficient condition (X) is also untrue.
___________
-
This does not match. This is more like:
- If X, then Y.
- X is true, so Y is true.
-
This isn’t the same.
- If X, then Y.
- X is not true, so Y is not true.
- This is a very different argument. This one is more of a personal argument – “don’t blame them if you couldn’t do better”. It very loosely might appear to match the format, but the reasoning is different.
- CORRECT. This matches our format exactly.
- This is a bit more of a complex argument that doesn’t match the stimulus’ format.
Recap: The question begins with “The writers of the television show Ambitions could make”. It is a Parallel Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Parallel questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.
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.
Hi – I do not understand how E does not have conditional logic in it (“due to”, “succeeding because”) – I interpreted these as causational triggers (If y happens, its because of x).
Hi! I think you may be misinterpreting Graeme’s explanation. It does not say that E doesn’t contain conditional language, but that it doesn’t match the format (structure) of the stimulus.
The stimulus says If X, then Y -> Not Y -> therefore not X. On the other hand, E is making a consistency point across two separate conditional relationships. So it’s not that it’s not conditional, the key part is that the structure is different from the stimulus. Hope that helps!