LSAT 91, Logical Reasoning I, Q14, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Some freelance journalists sell their work to magazines…

QUESTION TYPE: Parallel Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Some self-respecting journalists are not freelance journalists.

REASONING: Some freelance journalists sell their work to magazines with lax standards, but no self-respecting writer would do that.

ANALYSIS: The passage says “some freelance journalists”. If we have 100 freelance journalists, “some” could mean anywhere from 1-100 of them.

Then we find out that no self-respecting writers would sell work to magazines with lax standards. This tells us that “some” freelance journalists are not self-respecting writers. So let’s say 25 of our 100 freelance journalists are not self-respecting, and 75 are.

The flaw is, this doesn’t tell us anything about any other self-respecting writers. It could be that those 75 self-respecting freelance journalists are the only self-respecting writers in existence. We can’t assume there are any other self-respecting writers.

The argument would be right if it said “some freelance journalists are not self-respecting writers”. But it reverses these. The correct answer should make a similar reversal, and this will probably be the easiest way to identify it.

___________

1. This does not follow the same flawed reasoning.
2. This does not follow the same flawed reasoning.
3. CORRECT. This answer matches our reasoning. The correct conclusion would be “some students are not members of the Calculus Club”, but this is reversed here.
4. This does not follow the same flawed reasoning. This answer is actually a good example of how this reasoning should go.
5. This doesn’t match our flaw. It’s structured differently and the reversal still would not make sense based on the premise. Even if you changed the conclusion to “some coaches aren’t popular”, it doesn’t follow because we don’t know that keeping students in class makes a teacher unpopular.

Recap: The question begins with “Some freelance journalists sell their work to magazines”. It is a Flawed Parallel Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Flawed Parallel questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.

---