Parallel Flaw LR Qs, Conflicting Advice by PS and Kaplan Forum

[dlrkgml]

I'm confused as to which guideline to follow when solving Parallel Flaw Qs.

PowerScore says that a positive conclusion in the stimulus doesn't necessitate that the conclusion of the correct answer choice also be positive as long as other elements (method of reasoning, scope, validity, premises) all match up.

Kaplan however continually insists that a negative stimulus conclusion calls for a negative conclusion answer choice and vice versa.

If it helps at all, I'm referring to PT31 #23 in Section 3. I was reading the Kaplan explanations for the answer choices when I found this conflict. Kaplan wanted to get rid of answer choice D simply because its conclusion says "therefore, it is false..." since the stimulus conclusion stated "finalism, therefore, is clearly more plausible..."

Thank you!

[Jeffort]

The modality of the conclusion doesn't have to be the same in the CR as it is in the stimulus. Although the modality almost always matches, there are exceptions with both parallel and parallel flaw questions where it doesn't.

Using conclusion modality by itself as an elimination tool will cause you to eliminate the CR on some parallel questions, more so on recent tests than much older tests. If you look at Qs from early tests up to the 30s-40s range of PTs you won't find many where the CR has a modality mismatch, which is probably the basis for that Kaplan advice, but it's not uncommon on more recent tests from the 50s up to current for the CR to have different modality. It doesn't happen a lot but enough to make using that advice a bad idea for your score in case you get one on test day with a modality mismatch.

[dlrkgml]

That was such a comprehensive answer, thank you so much!!