LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 8916
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#33318
Complete Question Explanation

Parallel Reasoning—PR. The correct answer choice is (C)

This author warns against trying to pull out all of the weeds in one’s garden, despite the fact that weeds do have a detrimental effect on the productivity of a garden. The author’s conclusion is based on the premise that the loss in productivity is justified by the avoidance of the painstaking work that would be involved with locating and removing every single weed:
  • Premise: ..... Although weeds do reduce the productivity of a garden, the avoidance of the painstaking work
    ..... ..... ..... associated with the location and removal of every weed more than compensates for the slight loss
    ..... ..... ..... in productivity.

    Conclusion: ..... Thus, one should not try to remove every weed when weeding a garden.
The basic principle is that when the avoidance of some detriment (in this case, the removal of every last weed) becomes more trouble than it’s worth, some remaining detriment is acceptable (a few leftover weeds are preferable to the hassle of finding and removing them).

The stimulus is followed by a Parallel Reasoning Principle question, so the correct answer will present analogous reasoning, based on the same principle.

Answer choice (A): This choice begins in the right direction, but quickly goes off track. It is a mistake to try to remove every personality imperfection, but in this choice, the conclusion is based on the premise that true happiness requires some defects—this is rather different from the basis of the stimulus’ conclusion (that removal of the last few weeds, or defects in this case, is not worth the trouble).

Answer choice (B): This choice has a conclusion that is somewhat similar to that of the stimulus: in this answer, the conclusion is that one shouldn’t try to change every aspect of one’s personality, but in this case the basis is that such a change is more likely to make you worse off than better off. This is different from the stimulus’ basis, which is that finding the last few weeds is more trouble than is justified.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. Just like the stimulus, the author of this choice warns against too much perfectionism: like weeds, once there are only a few remaining imperfections, the trouble associated with locating and removing them no longer justifies the time and effort.

Answer choice (D): This choice advises against trying to remove all of the imperfections of one’s personality, much like the stimulus advises against trying to remove all weeds. In this choice, however, the conclusion is based on the premise that complete removal is not possible, whereas the stimulus’ conclusion was based on a different notion: not that removing every last weed was impossible, just that the time and effort to remove the last few would not be justifiably spent.

Answer choice (E): This choice advises against trying to remove imperfections that are not too serious, as doing so will lead to more serious issues (rather different from the stimulus, which concludes that one should not try to remove every single weed, because the last few are not worth the effort). Since the reasoning in this choice is not based on the same principle as that of the stimulus, this cannot be the right answer to this Parallel Reasoning question.
 SherryZ
  • Posts: 124
  • Joined: Oct 06, 2013
|
#11781
Hi,

When I read this question, I focused on "avoiding the painstaking effort of finding and pulling every single weed compensates for the slight productivity loss resulting from leaving a few."

Based on my understanding (obviously it is wrong :( ), "The painstaking effort of finding and pulling every single weed" :arrow: Answer Choice E "Cause one serious difficulties".

To the correct answer C, when I saw "it is no longer worth one's time to remove imperfections if there are only a few left", I hesitated. Because I thought the principle in the stimulus was talking about "Ppl should not clean clean sth completely If it is very troublesome to do so, it is ok to leave a few because avoiding the troublesome can compensate for the flaw which caused by leaving a few."

Could you help me out? Thanks a lot!

---Sherry
 Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1153
  • Joined: Apr 11, 2011
|
#11787
Hey Sherry,

Thanks for your message.

(E) deals with imperfections that are not too serious, as doing so will lead to more serious issues--this is very different from the stimulus, which concludes that one should not try to remove every single weed, because the last few are simply not worth the effort.

The stimulus is more like (C), which says that once there are only a few imperfections left, it's no longer worth the effort (just like the last few leaves...).

Please let me know whether that clears this one up--thanks!

~Steve
 SherryZ
  • Posts: 124
  • Joined: Oct 06, 2013
|
#11788
Hi Steve,

Thank you for solving my problem!! It is clear to me after you explained it! Thanks! ;)


---Sherry

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.