Ace Parallel Reasoning: Quick Tips & Strategies

Have you ever felt stumped by parallel reasoning or parallel flaw questions? These question types, often found in standardized tests like the LSAT, can be tricky because they require you to identify the answer choice that mirrors the structure or flaw in the original argument. But don't worry, with the right strategies and practice, you can tackle them efficiently and accurately. This guide will equip you with some tips and techniques to help you answer parallel reasoning questions and parallel flaw questions quickly and effectively.

Understanding Parallel Reasoning and Parallel Flaw Questions

Before diving into strategies, it's crucial to understand what these questions are truly asking. Parallel reasoning questions present an argument and ask you to identify another argument that exhibits similar reasoning. This means the answer choice should have the same logical structure, even if the topic is completely different. Think of it like recognizing the same melody played on different instruments – the tune is the same, but the sound might vary.

On the other hand, parallel flaw questions focus on logical fallacies. They require you to identify the answer choice that contains the same flawed reasoning as the original argument. It’s like spotting the same crack in two different vases – the flaw in the argument's structure is the key.

In essence, both question types are about recognizing patterns and structural similarities rather than focusing on the specific content. The key is to abstract the argument to its core components: premises, conclusion, and the relationship between them. Then, you can effectively scan the answer choices for the parallel structure or flaw.

Core Strategies for Tackling Parallel Reasoning Questions

When facing parallel reasoning questions, a systematic approach is your best friend. Here’s a breakdown of key strategies to help you conquer them:

• Identify the Core Argument Structure: The very first step is to dissect the original argument. Pinpoint the premises (the evidence or reasons given), the conclusion (the main point the argument is trying to make), and any assumptions (unstated beliefs that the argument relies on). Diagramming the argument can be immensely helpful here. Use symbols or abbreviations to represent different parts of the argument. For instance, you could use “P” for premise, “C” for conclusion, and arrows to show the flow of logic. This visual representation makes the underlying structure much clearer. For example, if the argument follows the pattern of "If A, then B. A. Therefore, B," you should look for an answer choice that follows the same pattern, regardless of what A and B actually represent.
• Abstract the Argument: Once you've identified the structure, strip away the specific details and focus on the abstract relationships between the premises and the conclusion. Replace the concrete terms with variables or symbols. This helps you avoid getting bogged down in the content and makes it easier to see the underlying form. This step is crucial because the content of the argument is irrelevant; it’s the form that matters. By abstracting, you're essentially creating a template that you can then match with the answer choices.
• Match the Structure, Not the Topic: Remember, the goal is to find an argument with the same structure, not necessarily the same topic. Don't be swayed by answer choices that talk about similar subjects but have different logical relationships. This is a common trap in parallel reasoning questions. The test-makers often include answer choices that are superficially similar to the original argument in terms of subject matter, but logically, they are quite different. Train yourself to ignore the content and focus solely on the structural parallels.
• Eliminate Based on Mismatched Elements: Start by eliminating answer choices that don't match the basic elements of the original argument. For example, if the original argument has two premises and a conclusion, eliminate any answer choices that have a different number of premises or conclusions. This simple step can often eliminate one or two answer choices right off the bat, saving you valuable time. Look for mismatches in the types of claims being made as well. Is the argument making a causal claim, a generalization, or a prediction? Eliminate options that don't align with this fundamental aspect of the argument.
• Pay Attention to the Strength of the Conclusion: The strength or certainty of the conclusion should also be paralleled in the correct answer choice. If the original argument has a strong, definitive conclusion (e.g.,