Free LSAT resources
Free law school admissions resources

Parallel flawed method of reasoning

(PF)

Stems that tell us the stimulus will exhibit flawed reasoning, then ask us to identify the answer choice that preserves that flaw.

Avg. 1.0 per section

“The flawed reasoning in which one of the following is most closely parallel to the flawed reasoning in the argument above?”

9%
12%
29%
33%
18%

Avg. difficulty: 3.4

Correct answer criteria

  • An argument that most closely matches the flawed reasoning in the argument in the stimulus.

Key tactics

  • Identify the conclusion and premises
  • Try to identify why the argument is flawed - why doesn't the conclusion follow from the premises?
  • Try to summarize the key elements of the premises and conclusion that you're looking to match in the correct answer
  • Be ready for conditional logic, which is common on these questions
  • Pay attention to the strength of language in the conclusion

Answer choice tips

  • Remember that the correct answer is supposed to have the same flaw. So if the answer's argument is valid, it's not going to be correct
  • If you're stuck on an answer, make sure to check whether the strength of the conclusion matches what we're looking for. (e.g., If the answer choice conclusion says "X will probably occur" but the stimulus conclusion said "X will occur" then this doesn't match and the answer is unlikely to be correct.) There are notable exceptions to this for Parallel Flaw questions, but eliminating based on strength of conclusion is still a good general rule of thumb

Looking for more?

7Sage offers a full course of video lessons that cover each question type in depth, targeted drills, and performance analytics.

Logical reasoning question types

Alternate explanation Analogy (LR) Argument part Bad authority Causal chain Causal mechanism Causal reasoning Circular reasoning Conditional reasoning Confusing sufficiency and necessity Correlation Diagram? Directionally wrong Eliminating options Equivocation Evaluate Except (LR) Failed alternate explanation False dichotomy Fighting the hypothetical Fill in the blank Flaw or descriptive weakening Illusory inconsistency Inference Internal contradiction Irrelevant corroboration Kick it up Lack of support v. false conclusion Link assumption Main conclusion or main point Math Mental state v. reality Method of reasoning or descriptive Miscellaneous (LR) Misdirected response Most strongly supported Must be false Must be true Necessary assumption Parallel flawed method of reasoning Parallel method of reasoning Part v. whole Phenomenon-hypothesis (LR) Plausibility Point at issue: agree Point at issue: disagree Principle PSA - find or complete the application PSA - find the rule Quantifier Relative v. absolute Resolve reconcile or explain Rule-application Sampling Source attack Strengthen Sufficient assumption Time Unwarranted assumption Value judgment Weaken Weighing factors

Reading comprehension question types

Analogy (RC) Application Art Author’s attitude Author’s perspective Comparative Critique or debate Describe approach Describe organization Describe relationship Except (RC) Humanities Implied Law Logical continuation Main point Meaning in context (of word, phrase, or idea) Miscellaneous (RC) Other’s perspective Phenomenon-hypothesis (RC) Principle or generalization Problem-analysis Purpose in context (of word, phrase, or idea) Purpose of paragraph Purpose of passage Science Single position Spotlight Stated Structure WSE (RC)

Confirm action

Are you sure?