LSAT Explanation PT 23, S3, Q17: If the recording now playing on

LSAT Question Stem

The pattern of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of the following arguments? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Parallel question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is C. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The passage states that if the recording playing on the jazz program is truly "Louis Armstrong recorded in concert in 1989," then Louis Armstrong would have been playing some of the best jazz of his career years after his death. Since the trumpeter was definitely Louis Armstrong, the announcer must have gotten the date of the recording wrong. In this argument, the premise is that the trumpeter was Louis Armstrong, and the conclusion is that the announcer must have gotten the date wrong.

Now, let's identify the question type and what it's asking us to do. The question type is a Parallel question, which asks us to find the answer choice that has a pattern of reasoning most similar to the argument in the passage.

Let's go through each answer choice:

a) This answer choice is not parallel to the passage's argument because it doesn't involve a conclusion based on an impossibility. The argument in the passage concludes that the announcer must have gotten the date wrong because it would be impossible for Louis Armstrong to play after his death. In this answer choice, the report being wrong about the acquisition being a painting doesn't involve an impossibility.

b) This answer choice is also not parallel to the passage's argument. While it does involve an impossibility (a painting being in two museums at the same time), it doesn't lead to a conclusion based on that impossibility. Instead, it concludes that the painting must have been mistitled, which doesn't parallel the passage's reasoning.

c) This answer choice is the correct one because it follows the same pattern of reasoning as the passage's argument. It states that if a twentieth-century Mexican artist painted in Japan during the seventeenth century, the work can be both "by Frida Kahlo" and a seventeenth-century Japanese landscape. Since it is what it appears to be (a seventeenth-century Japanese landscape), the label is wrong. This parallels the passage's argument, where the impossibility of Louis Armstrong playing after his death leads to the conclusion that the announcer got the date wrong.

d) This answer choice is not parallel to the passage's argument because it doesn't involve an impossibility. The argument in this answer choice is based on what Käthe Kollwitz is known for (her prints) rather than an impossibility, which doesn't parallel the passage's reasoning.

e) This answer choice is not parallel to the passage's argument because it doesn't involve a conclusion based on an impossibility. While it does state that if the painting is a portrait done in acrylic, it cannot be by Elisabeth Vigée-Lebrun, it doesn't lead to a conclusion based on an impossibility. Instead, it concludes that the paint must not be acrylic, which doesn't parallel the passage's reasoning.

In summary, the correct answer is C because it follows the same pattern of reasoning as the passage's argument, involving a conclusion based on an impossibility.