LSAT Explanation PT 22, S4, Q20: It would be wrong to conclude
LSAT Question Stem
The reasoning in which one of the following is most similar to the reasoning in the argument above?
Logical Reasoning Question Type
This is a Parallel question.
Correct Answer
The correct answer to this question is B.
LSAT Question Complete Explanation
This is a Parallel Reasoning question, which means we are looking for an answer choice that has reasoning most similar to the reasoning in the argument provided. The argument in the passage states that it would be wrong to conclude that a person has a Streptococcus infection if there is no other evidence than the fact that Streptococcus bacilli are present in the person's throat, as infection does not occur unless the host is physically run down. In other words, the presence of bacteria alone is not sufficient to determine an infection; another factor (being physically run down) must also be present.
Let's evaluate each answer choice based on this understanding:
Answer Choice (A): This choice talks about blurred vision being caused by either a physical defect in the person's eyes or certain drugs. It does not follow the same reasoning as the passage because it deals with two different factors that could be the exclusive cause of blurred vision, while the passage requires the presence of two factors to determine an infection.
Answer Choice (B): This choice is the correct answer. It states that one cannot predict if a lavender plant will bloom based on the presence of six or more hours of sunlight alone, as another factor (slightly alkaline soil) must also be present. This reasoning is similar to the passage, as both require the presence of two factors to make a determination.
Answer Choice (C): This choice discusses the survival of a bee colony during winter and states that low temperatures alone are not enough to determine the cause of the colony's failure. However, it doesn't mention a secondary factor that must exist to make a determination, so it does not follow the same reasoning as the passage.
Answer Choice (D): This choice involves the production of berries in a female holly plant and states that having more male holly plants nearby doesn't necessarily result in more berries. The reasoning is not the same as the passage, as it does not involve determining a condition based on the presence of two factors.
Answer Choice (E): This choice talks about determining hypertension based on a single high blood pressure reading, stating that only people with chronically high blood pressure can be called hypertensive. The reasoning here is not the same as the passage, as it focuses on the frequency of a condition rather than the presence of two factors to make a determination.
In conclusion, Answer Choice (B) has reasoning most similar to the reasoning in the passage, as both require the presence of two factors to make a determination.