Logical Reasoning Question Types-Parallel Reasoning

Logical reasoning (arguments) parallel reasoning problems are, arguably, the easiest of the logical reasoning problems to identify and to understand. Parallel reasoning problems simply ask the examinee to choose the answer selection that exactly mimics the reasoning used in the passage provided. Unfortunately, while these parallel reasoning problems are simple to identify, they possess plenty of undulations that create difficulty for examinees.

There are several specific tricks that examiners can employ to throw examinees off the trail when confronted with logical reasoning (arguments) parallel reasoning problems. First, examiners frequently make parallel reasoning problem passages unduly long. It is important for the examinee to focus on the argument established by the passage so that the structure of the argument can be deciphered, understood, and matched to that contained in one of the following answer selections. For this reason, the examiner will include a plethora of useless facts and verbiage to try to distract the examinee. This is an especially dubious trick given the lengthy nature of the LSAT in general, and the stress associated with the conditions.

Another ploy used by examiners is to include both correct and incorrect reasoning in logical reasoning (arguments) parallel reasoning problems. Remember, the examinee is required to identify the reasoning used in the argument contained in the passage and match it with the exact same (not similar) reasoning contained in one of the following answer choices. This means that sometimes the reasoning used in the argument contained in the passage will be accurate and sometimes it will be false. Generally, examinees will face two logical reasoning (arguments) parallel reasoning problems per logical reasoning section on the LSAT. Because the LSAT contains two logical reasoning sections, examinees will usually see four logical reasoning (arguments) parallel reasoning problems. Typically, examinees will see two parallel reasoning problems containing correct reasoning and two containing incorrect reasoning.

Another tactic used by examiners to fool examinees is to make the answer selections as different from the argument posed in the passage as possible from a content perspective. For example, the passage may construct a logical argument that is expressed in terms of government operations. Meanwhile, the answer selection that directly mimics the argument could be composed within any context from sports to sociology. This trickery highlights the importance of the examinee's ability to dissect the passage and filter out all of the commentary and distill the argument down to its foundational components. Once this is accomplished, the examinee's odds of finding the answer selection containing the parallel reasoning are greatly increased.

Consider a brief, oversimplified example:

Every Chef that works at a five star restaurant in Tampa has a culinary degree. Not all of the Chefs entered into the Tampa Cook-Off have culinary degrees. Therefore, some of the Chefs in the Tampa Cook-Off do not work at five star restaurants in Tampa.

Ideally, the examinee should ignore the subject matter of the passage argument and distill the basic reasoning. In the case of the above argument, a group is established. A common factor is identified that covers all members of the group. Then another group is identified and it is disclosed that not all of the latter group's members posses the common factor identified for the first group.