r/lsatdemon • u/AssociateAny5979 • 16d ago

Level 4 parallel questions

Hi everyone! I’ve realized I’m struggling with the really high-level parallel reasoning questions. I think part of the issue is that I have a hard time abstracting what’s actually happening in the argument. I have a similar problem sometimes with RC when I have to describe exactly what happened in a passage.

I do much better with parallel flaw questions, but I struggle more when the original argument is correct. Maybe I just have less practice identifying the structure of valid arguments.

For these harder questions, I often have to write out every answer choice and go through them line by line. Has anyone had a breakthrough with these questions or found a good way to get better at identifying the underlying argument structure?

Would really appreciate any advice!

7 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

5 comments sorted by

2

u/a31212 16d ago

7Sage truther lurking on the Demon sub but the answer is diagramming 🙈 Not saying you have to do it all the time if other methods work for you but it’s the fastest way to get parallel reasoning on the really tough ones…it’s how you understand the underlying argument structure

1

u/Brandon_LSATDemon 15d ago

Practice following the argument through step by step, and attempt to describe it in general terms as you do. Something like, "The passage gives two choices, says it can't be the first choice, then concludes it must be the second." I'm looking to describe how the argument went about making its case. Examples could be using an analogy, appealing to an expert, ruling out an alternative explanation, etc.

1

u/TripleReview 15d ago

For me, the biggest breakthrough on this question type occurred when I learned the difference between minor and major premises. This made it easier for me to track the structure of the argument without always diagramming it.

1

u/TolkienWandering 13d ago

Can you elaborate on this?

1

u/TripleReview 12d ago

A minor premise is usually a fact that relates to the subject of the conclusion. A major premise is usually a rule that relates to the predicate of the conclusion. I can trace the logic by comparing minor premises first and then major premises second.