### You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:20

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView
Choices
Curve Question
Difficulty
Psg/Game/S
Difficulty
Explanation
PT90 S2 Q25
+LR
+Exp
Parallel method of reasoning +Para
A
75%
163
B
4%
154
C
8%
154
D
6%
156
E
8%
157
140
150
160
+Medium 146.031 +SubsectionMedium

This is a Parallel Method of Reasoning question.

The stimulus states a conditional rule: complete-24 and thesis → elig-masters

Then it applies the rule to one particular person, Roger: complete-24R and /elig-mastersR

The /elig-mastersR contraposes on the conditional, which implies that for Roger, either he /complete-24 or he /thesis. But we’re already told that he complete-24, therefore it must be true that he /thesis.

All together, the argument looks like this:

• complete-24 and thesis → elig-masters
• complete-24R and /elig-mastersR
• ________________________________________________
• /thesisR

• mayor-app and council-app → open
• /open and council-app
• ________________________________________________
• /mayor-app

Answer Choice (B) has two problems.

• sci-fic → love or hate

This is the first problem. We need two jointly sufficient conditions. The second problem is that it’s not even clear if the “hate” condition is failed. (B) says, “I do not hate the movie I am watching now.” That suggests the author is reporting to us mid-movie. Like, he’s not even done with the movie yet. So, it’s possible that he changes his mind. The conclusion reinforces this with “probably.”

• govt-bought or other-bought → improve
• /improve
• ________________________________________________
• /govt-bought and /other-bought

This argument is valid but doesn’t match the form in the stimulus.

• sale → used or paperback
• saleB
• ________________________________________________
• /paperbackB → usedB

This argument is valid but doesn’t match the form in the stimulus.

• owe → higher or bankruptcy
• owe and /want-bankruptcy
• ________________________________________________
• higher

This argument doesn’t match the form in the stimulus. It’s also not valid because not wanting to declare bankruptcy isn’t the same as not declaring bankruptcy.