QUESTION TEXT: Fine short story writers are unlikely to…
QUESTION TYPE: Parallel Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Fine short story writers are unlikely to become great novelists.
REASONING: The two careers require very different skillsets. Very few writers can successfully do both.
ANALYSIS: This argument is pretty simple. A person who is good at short story writing is probably not good at writing novels, because very few people can do both.
We are looking for an argument which follows this reasoning. Look specifically for two categories, which have different requirements that rarely overlap in the same person or thing. The argument is specifically based on the probability that these skillsets can coexist in one person.
___________
- This is not the same. The original argument says that it’s unlikely for someone to be good at both. This argument is saying that it’s impossible for a car to be fuel-efficient and meet high standards, because they’re mutually exclusive. This argument is not about odds, but rather about what’s possible.
- This argument says that being good at synthesizing history makes you less likely to want to make original discoveries. The original argument doesn’t claim that one makes you less likely to pursue the other; only that they are both rare skills.
- This argument is saying that painters, because they are painters, can’t be objective scholars. This isn’t the same reasoning.
- This argument does say that two qualities are unlikely, but here the two qualities are needed for the same job. The original argument had two qualities that were needed for different jobs.
- CORRECT. This is exactly the same: two different skillsets are unlikely to both be present in the same person.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Leave a Reply