The number of aircraft collisions on the ground is increasing because of the substantial increase in the number of fl...

Julie-V July 18, 2019

Analogies vs. Examples vs. Irrelevance

Hi LSAT Max, I was wondering what is the best approach to determine whether information given to us about a different topic from the stimulus is aiding in the conclusion. (A), for example, gives an analogy on a completely different topic but is still the right answer because it's being used to prove a point. Are there any tips/strategies to determine when examples outside of the stimulus are being helpful to answer the question instead of bringing up irrelevant points? Many thanks in advance for the help!

Replies

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Christy August 22, 2019

I'm having the same issue as Julie, can someone provide help?

Thank you!!!

Reanna September 20, 2019

Me too, please help LSAT Max! I choose the seat belt answer (E) because I thought it eliminated an alternate cause. I could hear Mehran saying "'A' is totally irrelevant, who cares about theaters?"

shunhe January 6, 2020

Hi all,

I think one thing to note is that when the analogy is espousing a very similar principle, we shouldn't eliminate it off the bat. (A) is telling us about very similar safety measures about emergency exits and fatalities, and so even though it's about theaters, we should hang on to it. Then, going through the rest of the answers, we should realize that (A) is the best answer out of them. Hope this helps!