The Peril of Abstraction

Parallel Reasoning questions force you to evaluate six different arguments.
Parallel Reasoning questions are challenging because they are the most abstract
type of question on the LSAT. Not only must you understand the structure of
the argument in the stimulus, you must also understand the structure of the
arguments in each of the five answer choices. Juggling all this abstract
information is difficult, and you will learn how to effectively approach Parallel
Reasoning questions in the following pages.
We will address several effective ways to handle the abstract nature of these
questions, but first you must understand what approach not to take. Some
companies recommend that you make general abstract diagrams for the
elements in each stimulus and do the same for each answer choice. This
“general symbolization” approach involves representing the premises and
conclusion as “A,” “B,” “C,” etcetera, and writing them next to the stimulus.
This approach, while well-meaning, is hopelessly flawed. Parallel Reasoning
questions are difficult because they involve a great deal of abstraction. The use
of non-specific symbols such as “A,” “B,” and “C” further abstracts the stimulus
elements, increasing the difficulty instead of alleviating it.
Please note that the method described above is different than the symbolization
described in the conditional reasoning and causal reasoning chapters of this
book. In those chapters, we recommend diagramming in response to specific
logical formations, and we strongly recommend using symbols that directly
represent elements in the stimulus. That approach, when properly used, makes
the questions easier to attack.