SDCAR2010【逻辑入门】（十一）Parallel reasoning
　　Prompt for parallel reasoning:
　　• Which one of the following is most closely parallel in its reasoning to the reasoning in the argument above?
　　• Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its patterns of reasoning to the argument above?
　　Before you look at the answers:
　　1. Pinpoint the main conclusion in the passage. (Read my previous Main Point post.)
　　2. Separate the premises from everything else. After you find the main point, don’t assume that all the other statements are premises; they might include opposing viewpoints, background information, and concessions.
　　3. Note how the different concepts link together and how often each concept appears. In the sentence that “Harrison is unlikely to compete, unless Jones competes as well,” for example, unless links these two clauses together while compete appears twice: “A is unlikely to B unless C does B.” The correct answer will do something similar.
　　Then look for the answer that most closely matches the logical pattern you notices.
　　• Compare the conclusion in the passage with the conclusions in the answer choices. Once you narrow down the answers; compare the premises.
　　• Difference that do NOT matter between the passage and the correct answer choice:
　　 # Subject matter (passage is about monkeys; correct answer is about phones)
　　 # Order (passage gives the conclusion first; correct answer gives the conclusion last)
　　 # Form (passage says “A unless B”; correct answer says “If not B, then A”)
　　• Difference that matters:
　　 # Word strength (passage uses most; wrong answer uses all or some)
　　 # Negative vs. positive (passage uses “B and not B”; wrong answer uses “B and B”)
　　 If the conclusion in the passage is negative, the conclusion in the correct answer does not have to be negative. But watch for answers that incorrectly introduce negative terms. In the Harrison example above, for instance, an answer that says “Joey is unlikely to cook hot dogs, unless Micah does not cook hot dogs” would be wrong because it went from “B” to “not B,” while our original example went from “B” to “B.” Going from “not B” to “B,” on the other hand, would be fine.
　　 # Conditional statement (passage says “If A, then B”; wrong answer says just “B”)
　　 # Causal statement (passage says “A causes B”; wrong answer says just “B”)
　　 # Verb choice (passage uses can; wrong answer uses will)
　　 Can—what can happen
　　 Will—what will actually happen
　　 Must—what is required, but not necessarily happening
　　 Cause—what makes things happen
　　1. Zhonghua has proposed 3-year term limits for members of the party committee, many of whom have occupied their spots for over a decade. But an examination of Zhonghua’ record shows that he has held his seat on the party committee for nearly 13 years; so Zhonghua’ proposal does not deserve our consideration.The flawed reasoning in the argument above is most similar to the flawed reasoning in which one of the following?
　　(A) Ignore Ming’s proposed ordinance to provide tax credits to local business owners; Ming owns a local business.
　　(B) Do not give serious consideration to Gang’s proposal to eliminate tax deductions for property owners; he owns two homes in the community.
　　(C) We cannot trust this surgeon general’s health recommendations; he has been found guilty of both malpractice and corruption.
　　(D) Fang’s proposal to select a certain legal firm can be given no credence; Fang’s cousin is a partner at that firm.
　　(E) We can have little confidence in Mr. Zhang’s comments on the management of our steel plant; after all, Mr. Zhang has previously managed only banks and mini-marts.
　　2. An independent audit found no indication of tax avoidance on the part of the firm in the firm's accounts; therefore no such problem exists.
　　The questionable reasoning in the argument above is most closelyparalleled by that in which one of the following?

　　GMAT考试逻辑入门指导汇总>>>>

考试应用推荐：
你问我答	资料分享	在线模考	章节练习