# [Reasoning] Syllogism (All Cats are Dogs): Method, approach, techniques, shortcuts explained for IBPS, SSC, CSAT and CAT

#### टाइम होता नही,निकालना पड़ता है!

19 Days to IBPS-PO
27 Days to CGL14
83 Days to Mains

# Introduction to Syllogism

There are two main types of Syllogism question

 2-Statements 3-Statements Question Statement: I. All cats are dogs II. All dogs are birdsConclusion: I. Some cats are birds II. Some birds are cats. Question Statement A. All cats are dogs B. some pigs are cats C. no dogs are birdsConclusion I. some cats are dogs II. no birds are cats III. some pigs are birds IV. some pigs are not birds
• 2 Statement Syllogism questions are usually found in IBPS (Bank) and SSC exams.
• UPSC CSAT 2012 exam had quite a few questions on 3 Statement Syllogism.
• In CAT exams, they ask 2 Statement Syllogism but they pack 3-4 such “2-statement” syllogism questions inside one question to make it very time-consuming process.
• In this article, you will learn how to solve the 2 Statement syllogism questions.
• 3 Statement syllogism syllogism is explained in separate article (CLICK ME). (They’re mere an extension of the concepts explained in this article, so first master the 2-statement technique here.)

There are three methods to solve 2-statement Syllogism questions.

 Venn Diagram In the exam, Have to think of all possible “Venn-Diagram” situation and draw them to check every statement.= time consuming in the exam hall. AEIO (analytical Method) Have to mugup some rules, and spend some hours @home to master the “AEIO” conversion in your head. But once done, it is easy as a walk in the park. Distribution of terms (Tick method) Usually taught in CAT coaching classes and study material.Technique is very fast but It excludes the concept of “Conversion” and “Complementary cases”, hence sometimes makes it difficult to solve non-CAT questions.

The technique explained in this article, is a modified version of AEIO method combined with the Tick Method. Let’s call it U.P.-U.N. method.

# Subject vs Predicate

Consider this question statement
1. All cats are dogs
2. Some dogs are birds
3. No bird is a pig
4. Some pigs are not birds.
In all such statements, first-term is called subject and second is called predicate.
It doesn’t matter what word is given: Table, Chair, Raja, Kalmadi, Kanimozhi or Madhu Koda – first term is subject and second term is predicate.
Let’s relook at those question statements

 Subject Predicate 1. All cats are dogs Cats Dogs 2. Some dogs are birds Dogs Birds 3. No bird is a pig Bird Pig 4. Some pigs are not birds. Pigs Birds

I hope the Subject vs. Predicate is clear now. Let’s move to second thing

# Classification of statement

In syllogism, each statement usually has following format
“xyz subject is/are (not) predicate.”

For example,

 Xyz Subject Is/are (+/-not) Predicate All Cats Are Dogs Some Pigs Are not birds

Based on “xyz” and “not”, we classify the statements as following

 Statement Type Codename 1. All cats are dogs Universal Positive UP 2. Some dogs are birds Particular Positive PP 3. No bird is a pig Universal Negative UN 4. Some pigs are not birds. Particular Negative PN

Please remember following words. Whenever they come, you classify the statement accordingly.

 All, every, any, none, not a single, only etc. Universal (positive or negative) Some, many, a few, quite a few, not many, very little, most of, almost, generally, often, freqently, etc. Particular (positive or negative)

# Standard format: conversion

The standard 2-statement syllogism question format is following:
1. (xyz) “A” is/are (+/- not) “B”
2. (xyz) “B” is/are (+/- not) “C”
So basically it is
1. A—>B
2. B—>C
(read as “A to B then B to C”)
What does this tell us?
Question statements must have ONLY three terms. (A, B and C).
In the exam, if they give you two question statements with four terms then your time is saved! Just tick the answer “no conclusion can be drawn”.
For example

 Question statements Answer 1. All cats are Dogs 2. Some birds are pigs No conclusion can be drawn. Because it has four terms (cats, dogs, birds, pigs) A–>B C–>D

Anyways back to the topic,
The standard format for question statements is:

 1. A—>B 2. B—>C 1. First term—>Middle Term 2. Middle Term—>Third term

But if the given question statements are not given in this format, then we must convert them into above format. Otherwise we cannot proceed with answer. For example

 Given question statements are 1. A—>B 2. C—>B This must be converted into 1. A—>B 2. B—>C Given question statements are 1. B—>A 2. B—>C This must be converted into 1. A—>B 2. B—>C

Ok, so how to convert the statements?

## Universal Positive (UP)

 Given Statement Valid conversions Type Given Statement: All Cats are Dogs Some Cats are dogs Particular Positive (PP) Some dogs are cats Particular Positive (PP)

It means UP can be converted into PP.
Please note: if the statement is “Only Dogs are cats”, then better convert it into “All cats are dogs”. (Only A is B –> All B are A)

## Universal Negative (UN)

 Given Statement Valid conversions Type Given Statement: No Cats are Dogs Some dogs are not cats Particular Negative (PN) No dogs are cats Universal Negative (UN)

It means UN can be converted into PN or UN.

## Particular Positive (PP)

 Given Statement Valid conversions Type Some Cats are Dogs Some dogs are cats Particular Positive (PP)

It means PP can be converted into PP only.

## Particular Negative

Example: Some Cats are not Dogs. In Particular negative statements (PN), no conversion can be made.
So PN=can’t convert.
To sum up the conversion rules

 Type Valid Conversion Universal Positive (UP) Only PP Universal Negative (UN) PN or UN Particular Positive (PP) Only PP Particular Negative (PN) Not possible.

In some lower level exams, sometimes they directly ask about conversion. For example
Q. What can be concluded from the given statement: “Some Politicians are honest men.”

1. Some Honest men are not Politicians.
2. All Honest men are not politician
3. Some Honest men are politicians.
4. None of Above.

## Solution

well, the given statement “Some Politicians are honest men.” is a particular positive statement (PP).
Hence according to our table, it can be converted into PP only. Therefore

 Given answer choice Thought process Some Honest men are not Politicians. Particular negative (PN), hence eliminate. No Honest men are politicians. Universal Negative, hence eliminate Some Honest men are politicians. PP hence this is correct answer. None of Above. –not applicable because C is the correct answer.

In case you are wondering,
Q. Some politicians are honest men.
In above case, can’t the answer be “A”: Some honest men are not politicians?
Well, if you go by Venn Diagram method, it’ll lead to two cases hence it is “doubtful”.

## Case #1

In above situation, can you say “Some honest men are not politicians”?
Well you can’t say that. Because both Honest men (Sardar and Shastri) are in politician set.

## Case #2

• In above situation, can you say “Some honest men are not politicians”?
• Yes you can. Because two Honest men (Bhagat Singh and Azad) are not in politician set.
• The point is, whenever “two cases” are possible, you cannot ‘safely’ conclude one statement.

Hence, if the statement is

• Some “A” are “B”–> it doesn’t mean Some “B” are not “A”.
• The only valid conclusion in above case is :Some “B” are “A”.

Therefore Particular Positive (PP) statement can be converted into Particular Positive (PP) statement only.
Similarly

 Type of Statement Valid Conversion Path Universal Positive (UP)All cats(A) are dogs (B) Only PPSome Cats (A) are dogs. (B)Some dogs (B) are cats. (A) A to BB to A Universal Negative (UN)No Cats(A) are dogs (B) PN :Some Dogs (B) are not Cats (A). B to A UN: No Dogs (B) are cats. (A) Particular Positive (PP)Some cats (A) are dogs (B) Only PP: Some dogs (B) are cats(A) B to A Particular Negative (PN) Not possible. –

Anyways back to the topic, what are we discussing?

1. Topic of discussion is: How to solve 2 statement syllogism question
2. Subject vs predicate
3. Type of statements (UP, UN, PP, PN)
4. Standard format and conversion.

The standard question format is
A–>B
B–>C
If the given question doesn’t have statements in ^above standard format, then we must convert them into standard format. Only then we can proceed further.
So far, We constructed our shortcut table on how to convert the statements. Now

## let’s try some examples

 Question statements Conversion? 1. All Cats are dogs(B) 2. Some dogs(B) are not pigs. Already in standard format (A to B and then B to C) hence no need to convert. 1. Some dogs(B) are not pigs. 2. All Cats are dogs(B) No need to convert any statement. Just exchange the position of first and second statement. 1. All Cats are dogs(B) 2. Some dogs(B) are not pigs. 1. All Cats are dogs (B) 2. All pigs are dogs(B) Have to convert, because not in standard format.1.All cats(A) are dogs(B) 2.Some dogs(B) are pigs(C). (Rule UP-> only PP)

Now coming to the heart of the matter: how to solve the (stupid) 2 statement syllogism question?

# No conclusion Combos

Here are the non-conclusion combos when two question statements are in following format.

 First statement (A to B) Second statement (B to C) Answer Universal Positive (UP) Particular Positive (PP) No conclusion Particular Negative (PN) No conclusion Universal Negative (UN) Universal Negative (UN) No conclusion Particular Negative (PN) No conclusion Particular Positive (PP) Particular Positive (PP) No conclusion Particular Negative (PN) No conclusion Particular Negative (PN) Any other (UP, UN, PP, PN) No conclusion

^does it look difficult?
Not really. Let’s condense this table into mug-up rules.

1. UP’s politicians hate giving particular statements (both positive and negative). E.g. they donot reveal their clear position on FDI in retail until the 11th hour.
2. United Nations hates negativity. (both Universal and particular)
3. Pritish Nandy hates everybody.
4. Two-negatives=no conclusion. (although implicit in 2+3)
5. Two particulars=no conclusion. (although implicit in 1+3)

Please note: in ^above situations definite conclusion is impossible. However, sometimes two answer choices are still possible “either a or b”.
For the moment, let’s not complicate the matters with complimentary pairs.

1. first, make sure it contains only three terms (ABC) (else no conclusion.)
2. Make sure question statements are in standard format (A to B then B to C). If not in standard format, then re-arrange.
3. Classify the question statements. (UP, UN, PP, PN)
4. Check if the question statements have no conclusion combos (^Above rules)

if above things donot yield an answer, then we’ve to think about what will be the “conclusion(s)”?

# Conclusive-Combos

If you’ve followed above steps, then question statements in the format “A to B and then B to C.”

 First statement (A to B) Second statement (B to C) Conclusion Universal Positive (UP) Universal Positive (UP) Universal Positive (UP) (A to C) Universal Negative (UN) Universal Negative (UN) (A to C) Universal Negative (UN) Universal positive (UP) Particular Negative (PN). (C to A) Particular Positive (PP) Particular Positive (PP) Universal Positive (UP) Particular Positive (PP) (A to C) Universal Negative (UN) Particular Negative (PN) (A to C)

As you can see from above table,
The answer statement is usually in the format of A to C. with exception when first question statement is Universal Negative (UN).
Let’s condense this table into mug-up rules as well.

 Conclusive-Combos In your head, visualize UP+UP=UP If Uttar Pradesh meets Uttar Pradesh, then its size doesn’t increase. UP+UN=UN If Uttar Pradesh meets United Nations then its size increases and it becomes United Nations. UN+ (UP/PP)=PN United Nations Secretary Ban Ki Moon is in very positive mood. But he meets another positive person, and his attitude is totally reversed- he becomes particularly negative! (reversed =C to A) PP+ (UP/UN)=PP/PN When Mr.PP observes the universe via NASA telescope, his mood becomes positive or negative depending on the mood of universe.

Try a question from SSC-CGL (Tier-I, 2010) exam,

# DemoQ: Crazy men and Women

Question Statements

1. All men are women.
2. All women are crazy.

Conclusion

1. All Men are crazy
2. All the crazy are men
3. Some of the crazy are men
4. Some of the crazy are women

1. None of the conclusion follows
2. All conclusions follow
3. Only 1, 3 and 4 follow
4. Only 2 and 3 follow

(I suggest you pause here. First try to solve it on your own, without directly reading the solution. If you’ve difficulty, re-read rules given above)

## Solution

Our standard operating procedure (SOP)
Question Statements

1. All men are women.
2. All women are crazy.

First step: make sure four terms are not given = check. Only three terms (men, women, crazy)
Second step, make sure they’re in standard format (A to B and then B to C): Check yes they’re.
Hence conversion is not required.

 All men(A) are women. (B) (UP) All women(B) are crazy.(C) (UP)

Third step, classify the statements.

 All men are women. Universal Positive (UP) All women are crazy. Universal Positive (UP)

Fourth step: check the combo for question statements.

• Well, since it is UP+UP= its size doesn’t increase. Hence conclusion should be UP. (A to C) meaning All men(A) are crazy.(C)

 All Men are crazy Correct. All the crazy are men Recall that “conversion table”.Universal Positive (UP) can be converted only into Particular Positive (PP). Since All men are crazy => Some Crazy are men. But we cannot say All crazy are men. So this option is false. If you apply common sense at this stage: well, 1st statement correct, and 2nd statement is false, hence answer is (C): only 1, 3 and 4 follow! Some of the crazy are men Correct because of “conversion table” Some of the crazy are women Given question statement : All women are crazy. (Universal positive). If we apply conversion table (UP=> PP) then Some Crazy are women. Hence this statement is also correct.

Final answer (C): only 1, 3 and 4 follow
If you’re still staggering, I suggest you go through those rules again, note them down in a diary in your own words and language, revise a few times. Then try next question

# DemoQ: Intelligent Poets and singers

Question Statements (SSC-CPO exam)

1. All poets are intelligent
2. All singers are intelligent.

Conclusion

1. all singers are poets
2. some intelligent persons are not singers

1. only conclusion one follows
2. only conclusion two follows
3. either conclusion one or conclusion two follows
4. neither follows

## solution

first step: does the question statements have only three terms? Check: Yes. Singers, poets, intelligent. Good, proceed with next step.
Second step: Are the question statements given in standard format (A to B then B to C)?
Check. Nope

1. All poets (A) are intelligent (B)
2. All singers (C) are intelligent. (B)

Then we have to convert it into standard format. And since both statements are universal positive, we don’t need to worry about which statement to convert first? (that “priority order”, more about it, explained at the bottom of this article.)
Second statement is universal positive (UP), according to our table, we can only convert it into particular positive (PP) therefore
All singers (C) are intelligent. (B)==> Some intelligent persons(B) are singers.(C)
Now the new question statements, in the standard format (A to B then B to C) are
1. All poets are intelligent (B)
2. Some intelligent persons(B) are singers.
Third step, classify the question statements

 question statement type 1. All poets(A) are intelligent (B) Universal positive (UP) 2. Some intelligent persons(B) are singers.(C) Particular positive (PP)

Fourth step, apply the combo rules.
Since UP’s politicians hate particular statements (both positive and negative), hence no conclusion can be drawn. That means we cannot connect A to C or C to A.

 i. all singers(C) are poets (A) False. UP+PP=no conclusion, as explained above. ii. some intelligent persons are not singers Check the second original question statement : All singers are intelligent. (Universal positive –UP).According to our conversion table, UP can be converted into particular positive (PP) only. But this answer statement (II) is a particular negative statement. Hence this is also false.

# CAT-level

Same UP-UN Concept but they pack 3-4 or more syllogism questions into one question to test your speed, not just your understanding. for example:

# DemoQ: Sweet Testing Apples (CAT)

given question has five statements followed by options containing three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.
Question statements (CAT 1999)

1. Apples are not sweet
2. Some apples are sweet
3. All sweets are tasty
4. Some apples are not tasty
5. No apple is tasty

1. cea
2. bdc
3. cbd
4. eac

## solution and approach

we’ve to check the given options one by one.
Option (i). CEA. Meaning we’ve to take C as our statement (I), E as our Statement (II) and then observe, if statement (A) can be concluded from C and E.

 C All sweets are tasty Universal positive E No apple is tasty. Universal negative A Apples are not sweet Universal negative

In the actual CAT exam, we cannot afford to waste time in actually converting all statements and checking them.
Here is the fast approach
1. three terms?= yes
2. in standard format? No. but we can convert second (UN) into another UN and then combo rule is UP+UN=UN.
Hence this answer choice (CEA) is correct.

# DemoQ: Working mother nurses (CAT)

 question statement answer choices No mother is a nurse.Some Nurses like to workNo woman is prudeSome prude are also nursesSome nurses are womenAll women like to work ABECEDFEBBEF

Check the answer choices one by one.

## i. ABE

 A (Statement I) No mother is a nurse. (UN) B (Statement II) Some Nurses like to work E (Conclusion) Some Nurses are women.

This is invalid. Because Statement I and II have three terms (Mother, Nurse and work) while given conclusion statement adds fourth new term “women”

Move to next choice.

## ii. CED

 Statement Type C (Statement I) No woman is prude Universal negative E (Statement II) Some nurses are women Particular positive D (conclusion) Some prude are also nurses Particular positive

Question statements have three terms? Yes (women, prude, nurses)
Are they in standard format (A to B then B to C?) nope.

 No woman(B) is prude Universal negative Some nurses are women(B) Particular positive

change position of first and second statement.
1. Some nurses(A) are women(B)
2. No woman(B) is prude(C)

 question statement type 1. Some nurses(A) are women(B) Particular positive (PP) 2. No woman(B) is prude(C) Universal negative (UN)

Apply the combo rules
PP+UN=??

• When Mr.PP observes the universe via NASA telescope, his mood becomes particularly negative or positive depending on the mood of universe. Hence PP+UN=PN.(A to C)
• So legitimate conclusion is “Some Prune arenot nurses”.
• But Check the given conclusion statement: “Some prude are also nurses.” It is Particular positive (PP).
• But According to conversion table, PN cannot be converted. So we cannot say that since “Some prune are not nurses, that means some prunes are nurses!”
• Therefore given answer choice(ii) CED is false because D cannot be concluded from C+E.
• Move to the next answer choice.

Actual thought process: three terms =yes. Standard form=no. rearrange. But PP+UN=PN, can’t be converted to PP. Hence false.

## iii.FEB

 Statement Type F (Statement I) All women like to work Universal positive UP E (Statement II) Some nurses are women Particular positive PP B (conclusion) Some nurses like to work Particular positive PP

three terms =yes. Standard form=no. but no need to convert, just exchange position of statement I and II.

 Some nurses(A) are women(B) Particular positive PP All women(B) like to work (C) Universal positive UP

Apply combo rule, again same situation
When Mr.PP observes the universe via NASA telescope, his mood becomes particularly positive or negative depending on the mood of universe. Hence PP+UP=PP.(A to C).
Some nurses(A) like to work(C). Done! This is same as the given conclusion (B)
Therefore, final answer is (iii) FEB.

# DemoQ: 4 questions in 1!

This one is from CAT-1999.
Each of the given question statement as three segments. Choose the alternative where third segment of the statement can be logically be used using the both preceding two but not just from one of them
Question statements

1. all dinosaurs are prehistoric creatures. Water buffaloes are not dinosaurs. Water buffaloes are not prehistoric creatures
2. all politicians are frank. No frank people are crocodiles. No crocodiles are politicians
3. no diamond is quartz. No opal is quartz. Diamonds are opals.
4. All monkeys like bananas. Some Joes like bananas. Some Joes are monkeys.

1. Only C
2. Only B
3. Only A and D
4. Only B and C

## Approach

 C. Diamonds, Quartz, Opals. Three terms yes. Standard format =No.Both question statements are Universal negative. We can convert either of them, into UN or PN. But in any case, both question statements will remain negative. And Two negatives=no conclusion. So “C” is not possible. Hence answer choice (i) and (iv) eliminated. B. Frank politicians and crocodiles Already in three terms standard format.UP+UN=size enlarged and becomes UN. So conclusion should be “No crocodile is politician” so this statement is correct. Hence answer choice (ii).

The End?
No. Picture abhi baaki hai mere dost: just three more concepts before concluding the Two-Statement Syllogism

# Special Conversions

Recall that when question statements are not in standard format (A to B then B to C), in that case we’ve to convert them according to conversion table. Here are some special cases.

 Given Question statement Conversion (all applicable to all given question statements) Type None but Politicians are honest.No one else but Politicians are honest.Only politicians are honest.Politicians alone are honest All honest(people) are politicians UP No non-politician is honest.No honest (people) are non-politicians. UN Some politicians are honest PP

Second concept:

# Complimentary pairs

Earlier we saw there are five no-conclusion combos

1. UP’s politicians hate giving particular statements (both positive and negative). E.g. they donot reveal their clear position on FDI in retail until the 11th hour.
2. United Nations hates negativity of any type. (both Universal and particular)
3. Pritish Nandy hates everybody.
4. Two-negatives=no conclusion.
5. Two particulars=no conclusion.

For example

 Question statement 1. Some Politicians are male.2. Some males are honest. Conclusion 1. Some Politicians are honest.2. No Politicians are honest.

1. Only 1 follows
2. Only 2 follows
3. Either 1 or 2 follows
4. Neither follows

Apply the standard operating procedure:
Three terms? Check: yes
Are they in standard format? A to B then B to C? check. Yes
Then classify the statements

 1. Some Politicians(A) are males(B) Particular positive. 2. Some males(B) are honest(C) Particular positive.

From the given rules, Two particulars = No conclusion!
But please observe one of the answer choice (C)= Either 1 or 2 follows.
Consider these cases

## Case#2

In this case#1: some politicians (Sardar and Shastri) are honest.
So “conclusion (1) may be possible.”

## Case#2

In this case, No politician is honest.
So “conclusion (2) may be possible.”
Therefore answer becomes “Either 1 or 2 follows”
Such syllogism-situations are called “complementary”.
You’ve to check following things, before thinking about “complementary” cases.

1. Two statements with three terms? Yes
2. Question statements are given in standard format (A to B Then B to C). if not, then rearrange or convert them.
3. Classify the statements (UP, UN, PP, PN)
4. Apply the rules. Get the answer.
5. If Step #4 gives “No conclusion” AND one of the answer choice is in the format of “Either I or II follows”, only then check for complemantary case.

## Checklist: complementary case

1. Two answer choices have same subject and predicate.
 Applicable Not applicable 1. Some Politicians are honest.2. No Politicians are honestBecause both have common subject (politician) and common predicate (honest) 1. Some Politicians are honest.2. No Honest are Politicians.In first statement, subject=Politician but in second statement, subject= Honest. Hence complemantary case not possible.

2). The answer choice combo must be either of these three

 Answer choice combo example Uttar Pradesh (UP) + Pritish Nandy (PN) 1. All Politicians are honest. 2. Some Politicians arenot honest PP + Pritish Nandy (PN) 1. Some Politicians are honest. 2. Some Politicians arenot honest PP + United Nations (UN) 1. Some Politicians are honest. 2. No Politicians are honest

When these two conditions are met, then answer would be “Either (I) or (II) follows.”

# Priority order

You know that when Question statements are not in standard format (A to B Then B to C), we must convert them. But here is a thing to keep in mind. Consider these statements

Question statements:
1. All Dogs are Cats.
2. Some Dogs are Pigs.
Common term or middle term is Dogs. So that’s our “B”.
1. All Dogs(B) are Cats.
2. Some Dogs(B) are Pigs.
We can convert it via two routes

 Route #1 Route #2 Just convert the first statement. 1. Some Cats are dogs. (Rule: UP to PP) 2. Some Dogs are pigs. We’ll re-order the statements. (that is interchange thee position of both statements) 1. Some dogs(B) are pigs 2. All Dogs(B) are Cats Now we’ll convert the first statement. 1. Some pigs are Dogs (B) (Rule: PP to PP) 2. All dogs (B) are cats.

Both routes are valid.
Now the question is, which route should be preferred?
The priority order is:
1) Particular positive (PP) >> 2) Universal Negative (UN) >> 3) Universal Positive (UP)
Note: we’ve not included Particular Negative (PN) in this order because PN cannot be converted. So according to this priority order PP>UN>UP, route #2 is the more suitable approach. (although such complications don’t usually arise in most of the questions).

# Tricky Situations: Priority order

Consider this scenario

 Question statements Conclusion All women(B) are birdsSome women(B) are tree Some birds are treeAll trees are bird.

As you can see, the question statements are not in standard format (A to B then B to C).

So, which question statement to convert?

First the wrong approach.

 WRONG Since question statements are not in standard format (A to B then B to C), hence we’ll convert first statement. (UP to PP)After conversionSome birds(A) are women (B)Some women(B) are treeBoth question statements are particular, hence final answer=No conclusion. (please note: this approach is wrong, because we’ve not followed the priority order).

Now the correct approach

 CORRECT The priority order for Statement conversion is PP>UN>UP.Meaning, if there are two question statements, and we’ve to convert one of them to make it a standard format=> then we’ll convert Particular positive statement first.So in the given caseAll women(B) are birdsSome women(B) are treeConvert second statement. (PP to PP)All women(B) are birds.Some trees are women(B).Now exchange positions of question statementsSome trees are women(B). (PP)All women(B) are birds. (UP)Now they’re in standard format, apply combo rule: PP+UP=PP (Nasa telescope rule!)Hence conclusion isSome trees are birds. (PP)We can also say that Some birds are trees. (PP to PP conversion). Therefore answer is (1)

Moral of the story: Conversion priority: PP>UN>UP. Especially when you’re getting PP+PP= no conclusion after conversion.

# Tricky Situations: 1-Statement Conclusion

 Question statements Conclusion All the flowers are leaves.(B) (UP)Some leaves(B) are birds (PP) Some birds are flowersSome leaves are flowers

Question statement contains only three terms=yes.

Are they in standard format? (A To B then B to C?) =Yes.

Apply combo rules: UP+PP=No conclusion because Uttar Pradesh’s politicians hate particular statements.

But here’s the catch. Observe the conclusion statements carefully

 Conclusion statement Thought process Some birds are flowers Not possible because combo rule. Some leaves are flowers first question statement says All flowers are leaves. If you apply the conversion rule UP->PP, thenAll flowers are leaves=> Some leaves are flowers. Hence this conclusion is correct, although it did not employ both question statements.

Moral of the story: Read terms (subject-predicate) of  conclusion statements.

# Summary

What to do when 2-statement syllogism question is given?

1. They must have only three terms (A, B and C)
2. Are the question statements in standard format (A to B then B to C)? if no, then refer to following conversion table. (important: priority order for conversion is PP>UN>UP.)
 Type Valid Conversion Universal Positive (UP) Only PP Universal Negative (UN) PN or UN Particular Positive (PP) Only PP Particular Negative (PN) Can’t do.

3. Classify the Question statement (UP, UN, PP, PN)
4. Apply the combo rules on Question statements.

## Yes conclusion

1. UP’s politicians hate giving particular statements (both positive and negative). E.g. they donot reveal their clear position on FDI in retail until the 11th hour. (UP+PP/PN=NO)
2. United Nations hates negativity. (both Universal and particular)(UN+UN/PN=NO)
3. Pritish Nandy hates everybody. (first statement is PN=NO, Irrespective of second statement.)
4. Two-negatives=no conclusion.
5. Two particulars=no conclusion.
1. If Uttar Pradesh meets Uttar Pradesh, then its size doesn’t increase. (UP+UP=UP)
2. If Uttar Pradesh meets United Nations then size increases and it becomes United Nations. (UP+UN=UN)
3. United Nations Secretary Ban Ki Moon is in very positive mood. But he meets another positive person, and his attitude is totally reversed- he becomes particularly negative! (reversed =C to A). (UN+UP/PP=PN)
4. When Mr.PP observes the universe via NASA telescope, his mood becomes particularly positive or negative depending on the mood of universe.(PP+UP/UN=PP/PN)

5. (rarely required): if no-conclusion and “either or” given in answer, then check for Complimentary case.

This concludes the discussion on 2 statement Syllogism question.
In later article, we’ll see the 3-statement syllogism. It is basically extention of the same UP-UN method that we learned here. However, to quickly solve 3-statements, first you must become a master of 2-statement. So, practice as many sums as you can, from any of the following books.

For the whole archive of Aptitude related articles, visit Mrunal.org/aptitude

[Reasoning] Syllogism (All Cats are Dogs): Method, approach, techniques, shortcuts explained for IBPS, SSC, CSAT and CAT
﻿

## So far 553 Comments posted

1. sanjeet chand dwivedi

I am not able to apply UP-UN method as I got negative marking for applying for these types of question .U have not advised about possibility type of questions .

Could you please elaborate application of UP-UN Method to these types of questions –

Question 1-

statements –

No memory is good .
Some heart are speed and bad .

Conclusions –

b.Some speed are heart.

Ans . Both conclusion Follows (later I solved through common sense by last statements still I am not able to solve by up-un m/d )

Question 2.

Statements –

Some one are two
Some three are both one and two together
No two is four .
All four are five .

Conclusions –

1. some two are both one and three
2.Some one being both two and three is possibility

ans – Only 1 follows .sir ,U have not advised about possibility type of questions .

1. Tilak

Above describe rule on based on generic approach of syllogism. If you know about syllogism just read the basic rules of solving syllogism question. By the way remember that there are solution to solve reasoning questions you don’t add any extra logic from your side just keep in mind the statements always true according to conclusions.

Now about your Question 2: this question taken from mahendra’s ST portal Speed Test for SBI PO — remember you are not able to solve ” and, or, both, together etc” type question using UP UN or A I E O methods… use venn diagram and solve these question except possibility question to get accuracy about solving questions. If you are not able to draw diagram

1. Vijender Sharma

We can solve such questions using Analytical method (UN UP or AEIO whatever you call it) only if we know how to reduce such statements to standard form.
in Sanjeet’s question No. 1 statement
Some hearts are speed and bad should be rewritten as two different statements
I. Some hearts are speed.
Both the conclusions are converted forms of the above two statements i.e.
I. Some speed are hearts.
and in question No. 2 Statement
Some three are both one and two together has following implication
I. Some one are two.
II. Some three are two which are one also.
So conclusion I clearly follows and II is rejected because it is not possibility but it is definitely true.
Venn Diagram representation of the above statement would be three intersecting circles having all the three elements common.

2. sanjeet chand dwivedi

Thanks a lot ,Tilak .These are the questions of Mahenra’s STor SBI PO .This is true .

According to you,I should mix venn diagram method with my favorite “UP UN” method .

1. Tilak

No! you must know about yourself, how many questions(types) you can solve using above rule.

As I have followed above rule I am able to solve 60% question correctly but not whole some places “UP UN” failed to solve question. As I discussed previous year on same topic on same blog I found “this method is more difficult on solving non standard format questions using conversion rule.”

Only on thing you must able to solve these questions with minimal time with accuracy for this which method you choose depending only you.

2. richa

could you please provide solution to this question from SBI PO exam:
all songs are poems.
all poems are rhymes.
no rhyme is a paragraph.
Conclusion: 1-no song is a paragraph.
2-no poem is a paragraph.
Conclusion: 1-all rhymes are poems.
2-all songs are rhymes.
Both the conclusions are two separate questions.
thank you.

1. sanjeet chand dwivedi

Stmt. 1 . UP (so-po)
2.UP (po-rh)
3.UN (rh-pa)

question -1
1+2=UP(so-rh) —— > 4
4+3 =UN(so-pa) conclusion 1 is true
2+3=UN(po-pa) conclusion 2 is true

question -2
stmt .2 (UP —— > PP ) RH PO

So conclusion 1 is wrong .
conclusion 2 is true as per solution of conclusion 1 of question 1 i.e equation 4 .

3. Hemen

1).Some pups are cows
no kitten are pups
and
2).All lotus are flowers
no lily is a lotus.

i have got different different answers from various books…..i totally followed your rules but just a little confusion in here…….so i hope u would focus ASAP……….thank you

4. karthik

Hai mrunal i tried your techniques for syllogism in sbi po previous question papers but out of five only one is getting correct pls give some sbi po previous yer questions with solutions.

1. Tilak

Read Analyticay Reasoning by M . K . Pandey and use Practice book on analytical reasoning by M. Tyra by BSC Publication

1. Tilak

Read Analyticay Reasoning by M . K . Pandey and use Practice book on analytical reasoning by M. Tyra by BSC Publication

5. Vijender Sharma

What if the given statement are mutually inconsistent as in the example given below.
A. All verbals are logics.
B. No syllogisms are logics.
C. Some verbals are syllogisms.

Conclusion
I Some syllogisms are logics
II. Some logics are not syllogisms.
III. No logics are syllogisms
IV. Some syllogisms are verbals.

Here the given statements are mutually inconsistent as A+C = Some syllogisms are logics, but the statement
B say No Syllogisms are logics. So Taking two different statement will lead to two different inconsistent conclusions.

1. SASIKANTH B

IV and III are absolutely true, and the ans can be IV & II and III or IV & iii or None of the above
Check the options for such questions and answer

6. Vijender Sharma

Another problem in solving syllogistic reasoning questions by analytical method is the specific cases of syllogisms ( Subsets) e. g.
Statements
A. Some dogs Bark.
B. All Dogs Bite.
C. All Lions bite.
D. Those Animals who bite are not dangerous.

Conclusions
I. Even those dogs who don’t bark bite.
II. Those dogs who don’t bark, don’t necessarily bite.
III. All those dogs which are of white colour, bite.
IV. Some dogs are lions.

Here I, II are specific conclusion. Statement B says All dogs bite, so it does not matter whether they bark or don’t. So Barking dogs and non barking dogs are subset of the term dogs and therefore I follows.
II does not follow as it goes against what statement B says. All dogs bite means all dogs necessarily bite,

7. Sai Grace

Sir, I got doubts in the following type of syllogisms.Can u please explain using our UP-UN method.

1) Statements : No gas is liqiud.
Some liquids are solids.

Conclusions : 1. Some solids being gases is a possibility.
2. Atleast some gases are solids.

(1)Only 1 (2)Only 2 (3)Both 1 and 2 (4)None follows (5)None of these

3) Statements : Some lines are circles.
All circles are balls.

Conclusions : 1. All ball being lines is a possibility.
2. There is a possibility that some balls are neither circles nor lines.

(1)only 1 (2)only 2 (3)Both 1 and 2 (4)None follows (5)None of these

Thank you..

1. Tilak

Try to solve using commonsense else download reference chart of UP UN Method from easystudy.co.in after creating account. Thanks

2. Tilak

Possibility question are mostly easy using UP-UN method. Find the rules and logic and download it from easystudy.co.in and if any help required then just drop a request using easystudy.co.in contact us

8. Ankur Jain

Hi!

Hats off to your method .

yesterday night i was trying solving some practice questions from Arihant Publication for SBI PO.

atleast in 3 question out of first 10 he has use a single statement conversion as PP –> PN and choose the conclusion .. i am confused whether examiner will consider PP–> PP only or PP –> PP/PN valid… please guide..

1. Akash

Did you get the answer to that ?

Statement 1 – All informative things are useful.
Statement 2 – Some websites are not useful.
Also, could you help me with ^ !?

9. Deepti

Hello Sir, could you please provide solution to this question:

A. All cats,dogs and elephants are rats
B.No elephant is a cat or dog and some cats are dogs.

Conclusion:
1. No rat is cat,dog as well as elephant.
2.Some rats are cats as well as dogs

as per rules two statement syllogism have only three terms, if 4th term given we simply tick ‘no conclusion can be drawn’. but as per book answer is ‘b’ i.e, some rats are cats as well as dogs

1. SASIKANTH B

Yes the answer is (b), because you just need to coverse the statements given to you

A) All cats are rats, all dogs are rats and all elephants are rats

The above Universal Positive Statement can be converted to PP statement
Some rats are cats, some rats are dogs and some rats are elephants

These would be enough to derive at an answer

10. Ratool Mukherjee

Hello,

Your method is wonderful. But i have a doubt here.

For question like:
Some dogs are cats
Some cats are parrots
Conclusion:
1. Some cats are dogs
2. Some parrots are cats
3. All
4. No Conclusion

Here, no syllogism conclusion can be formed since two particulars are present. But, the conclusions are direct conversions of the statements. Hence “3. All” should be the correct answer according to me. But in all the books “4. No conclusion” is given as the answer.

1. SASIKANTH B

These conclusions are absolute true based on the Conversion method of the Immediate Deduction Method. You are absolutely right

sir

Statement1:Some Pens are pencils
Statement2:Some Pencils are Eraser

Conclusion1;Some Eraser are not pencils
Conclusion2;Some Pencils are pens

As per the above rules answer is no conclusion

but in the book it is given that conclusion 2 follows.

please explain me how to solve this

1. Tilak

I think you must read all rules again— as the conclusion 2: Some Pencils are pens are conversion of Statement1: Some Pens are pencils.

hence it’s correct.

The sequence for solving 1. Is consusion from “one statement conversion means from one line statement”. 2. Is conclusion from “two statement means UP UN Method” 3. If conclusions are not true check weather any either or case holds.

For more visit easystudy.co.in

2. संकल्प

My Dear friend…
Conclusion 2 is right (TRUE)

How?
Let’s see..
Statement 1-
Some pens are pencil
In this statement both subject and predicate are not distributed
So it means in conclusion also not b distributed…
But
In conclusion 2 pencil is distributed so eliminate this coz it is wrong conclusion..

Now come to the next statement i.e. 2
Some pencils are eraser (I type)
Again both are not distributed
So again in conclusion must not b distributed..
Let’s see
Conclusion
Some pencils are pen (I type)
Both are not distributed..
So this is the valid conclusion.

My typing is not good
Bt
Matter nt tthis

Please read analytical reasoning by mk pandey BSC publication for more depth

12. SANJEET CHAND DWIVEDI

Statements:
All bloom are spring.
Some flowers are simple.
No simple is golden.
Conclusions:
I. Only bloom being simple is a possibility.
II. Those golden, which are not simple, being bloom is possibility.

1. SANJEET CHAND DWIVEDI

As No simple is golden,so “Those golden, which are not simple, being bloom is possibility.” means that all golden being bloom is possibility. Just solved it,by common sense .

1. SASIKANTH B

The first thing you must learn is Syllogisms are logical statement and you must not use common sense while solving them. Because all dogs are cats If u use common sense that makes it false.

Only bloom being simple can be converted to any of the following 4 statements:
a) All bloom is simple
b) No simple is non bloom
c) No bloom is non simple
d) Some bloom are simple

Hence both 1 and 2 are correct

13. karna

A) if only conclusion I follows
B) if conclusion II follows
C) if either I or II follows
D) if neither I nor II follows
E) if both I and II follows

1. Statements: All businessmen except Bhimji are dishonest
All dishonest people smoke
Conclusion: I. All businessmen except smoke
Bhimji smokes

2. Statements: Few takers are givers
No givers are almighty
Conclusion: I. Some takers are almighty
II. Some almighty are not takers

1. karna

A) if only conclusion I follows
B) if conclusion II follows
C) if either I or II follows
D) if neither I nor II follows
E) if both I and II follows

1. Statements: All businessmen except Bhimji are dishonest
All dishonest people smoke
Bhimji smokes
II.Bhimji smokes
2. Statements: Few takers are givers
No givers are almighty
Conclusion: I. Some takers are almighty
II. Some almighty are not takers

14. SANJEET CHAND DWIVEDI

Mrunal Sir,

could you please solve this by UP -UN method as I am getting different answer from ven diagram as given in mahendras ST for SBI PO ?

Question :

In each question given below four statements are followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to take the four statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read the conclusions and decide which logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts :
Statements-
No memory is good.
Some heart are speed and bad.
Conclusions-
(II) Some speed are heart.

1. संकल्प

@ sanjeet
1- according to Law of Distribution borh are invalid conclusion..

But
By UN/PN method both are valid with last two statements…

Law of Distribution more considerable in Logic..

Wts Ans?

2. Narasimha

The answer is in the last statement of the question
Some heart are speed and bad= Some heart are speed and some heart are bad= Some speed are heart and some bad are heart

15. SANJEET CHAND DWIVEDI

Mrunal Sir,

could you please solve this by UP -UN method as I am getting different answer from ven diagram as given in mahendras ST for SBI PO ?

Question :

In each question given below four statements are followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to take the four statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read the conclusions and decide which logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts :
Statements-
Some one are two.
Some three are both one and two together
No two is four. All four are five.
Conclusions-
(I) Some two are both one and three.
(II) Some one being both two and three is a possibility.

16. SANJEET CHAND DWIVEDI

Question :

Each of these questions consists of a question followed by informations in three statements. You have to study the question and the statements and decide that information in which of the statement(s) is/are necessary to answer the question.
Are some pink, yellow?
I. All pink are green.
II. Some green are yellow.
III. Some yellow are pink.

Ans – Given Only III are 1 and II together ,in my view only III follows .As from I and II ,There can be no conclusion drwan between Pink and Yellow .

Mrunal Sir ,Could you please clearify ?

1. SASIKANTH B

Some yellow are pink can be converted to Some pink are yellow. Only one option can give the answer to the question of whether some pink are yellow.

sir,
I have a doubt,as i read somewhere,In special conversions/for PP subject&predicate should be interchanged so it must be “some honest are politicians”

18. Sumit Srivastava

Can somebody please explain the following two:

1) Statements: A graduate is a man
Conclusions: I. This thief is a man
II. Some men are thief

2) Statements: Men are sinners
Saints are men
Conclusions: I. Saints are sinners
II. Sinners are saints

A) If only conclusion I follows
B) If only conclusion II follows
C) If either I or II follows
D) If neither I nor II follows
E) If both I and II follows

Thanks!

19. utkarsh

Hello Sir,
pg 7 R s agarwal

S 1: All students in my class are intelligent(UP)
S 2: Rohit is not intelligent(UN)

C 1: Rohit is not a student of my class
C 2: Rohit must work hard

Acc. to priority order UN should be followed by UP,
and for std. format UP is converted to PP.
and it goes like
S1 : Rohit is not intelligent(UN)
S 2: SOME INTELLIGENT ARE STUDENTS OF MY CLASS (PP)

now, acc to you
UN + PP = PN(C->A) , so it must be like so SOME STUDENT OF MY CLASS ARE NOT ROHIT.
so finally i got wrong myself, where am i commiting mistake, if not what is answer,
PLS HELP ME.

1. संकल्प

My Dear friend,
Here I’m trying 2 solve ur question..
Let’s see,

Firstly rewrite the question in this way..
1- All student in my class are intelligent
2- Rohit is not intelligent or
Rohit (a student) is not intelligent
(why? Bcoz- a positive sentence with a very definite exception is also of A type/ UP)

Now
According to conversion priority i.e. IEA
Converse the 2nd proposition n after conversion, its look like-

2- All students are intelligent accept ROHIT (A or UP, wtevr u say)

Now the proposition is-
1- All STUDENTs in my class are INTELLIGENT (A type or UP)
2- all students are INTELLIGENT accept ROHIT (A Type or UP)

n according to the conclusion rules…
A+A–A

So conclusion will b-
All r students of my class accept ROHIT
Or
Rohit is not a student of my class

1. संकल्प

My typing mistakes…

Now the proposition is
2- statement………

20. SAGAR

can u pls solve this
some towers are lanes
some rivers are jungles
conclusion;
3 some jungles are towers

1. Tilak

Hi Sagar,

It’s too simple you are just taking a pain to solve it. just be cool and solve with step by step…

Now lets starts…..

First you know where we start and how to approach to answer with 100% accuracy.. for this you need mung up some rules(available on R S agrawal ) for faster approach reason behind this, on competitive exam you need to solve question in least time.

Lets starts to solve question step by step..

Conclusion 1 :- some jungles are roads .. take it and search in statements for jungles and roads —-weather they are from one statement or two or more statements.— on seeing the statements we find that it from two statements—some roads are rivers and some rivers are jungles…. on it common term is rivers….now we know that some + some = no conclusion….hence this conclusion is incorrect

Conclusion 2 :- some roads are lanes .. take it and search in statements for roads and lanes —-weather they are from one statement or two or more statements.— on seeing the statements we find that it from one statement—some lanes are roads…. and conclusion is conversion of this statement….hence as per conversion rule this conclusion is correct.

Conclusion 3 :- some jungles are towers .. take it and search in statements for jungles and towers —-weather they are from one statement or two or more statements.— on seeing the statements we find that it from four statements—some towers are lanes, some lanes are roads, some roads are rivers and some rivers are jungles…. here you may be confuse ..but don’t worry just keep and start form first to last –by means …just cancel all middle terms —-now add every some or else-were mean some+some etc…..here all statement are in some….hence no conclusion form first to last(remember minimum two statements included). Hence this conclusion is incorrect.

Conclusion 4 :- no jungle is road .. take it and search in statements for jungles and roads —-weather they are from one statement or two or more statements.— on seeing the statements we find that no negative statement are statement….hence this conclusion is incorrect

Now what we can do just tick the answer “only conclusion two follow”…no it’s a wrong practice….we have left one step which is to check either or pair …for this take all incorrect conclusion and search for which have subject and predicate are same and one is negative and one is positive and most important one statement must be particular by mean some or some not…..after searching in incorrect conclusions we have find Conclusion 1 :- some jungles are roads and Conclusion 4 :- no jungle is road have same predicate and one is negative, one is positive and one particular also… hence here either or case follow by means “either 1 or 4 is follow” —-

hence correct answer is ……only 2 and either 1 or 4 follow….. for more best tricks visit my website which is belong same rules possibility tutorial… easystudy.co.in

May be some typing mistake or grammar or spelling mistakes just ignore it…

Any correction is mostly welcome…

Thanks…

Sir is thr any othr way of solvng these sums bcoz conversion method is quite vry confusing nd lengthy

22. Akash

Dude, this helped A LOT !!! You have excellent teaching skills (and writing too) ! Way to go !

23. Vikas Agre

no color is paint
no paint is a brush
conclusions 1. no color is brush 2.all brushes are color
..as per this method no conclusion because both are negative..but ans of this question is either conclusion 1 or 2 follows..please i need help

24. Akash

Would someone kindly explain PP + PN questions ! I am getting wrong answers most of the times ! :/

25. pratibha

In the above question Demoq: crazy men and women,conclusion 4 which is “some crazy are women” follows.but if the same is solved by distribution method whose one of the rule says”conclusion must not contain middle term”,conclusion 4 should not follow as it contains middle term.Answers are in contrast in both methods.what to do?please help..

26. pratibha

In the above question Demoq: crazy men and women,conclusion 4 which is “some crazy are women” follows.but if the same is solved by distribution method whose one of the rule says”conclusion must not contain middle term”,conclusion 4 should not follow as it contains middle term(women)..Answers are in contrast in both methods.what to do?please help..

27. pratibha

statement-All x are y.
some x are z.
conlusion- some y are z
some z are y.
some y are not z.
some z are not y.
here we will convert pp into pp. this makes 2nd statement as some z are x.then we will interchnge the the statements.this gives pp+up combo.resulting into pp.so answer should b 1 and 2 only. how 3 follows??

28. Diptiranjan

Sir,
would u kindly provide any tricks for possibility questions on sylloism by AEIO method….. Thank you

29. UJJAWAL

please provide the solution of following :
1. STATEMENTS: A.some trains are car.
B.all cars are rivers.

CONCLUSION: 1.some rivers are train.
4 follows
only 1 and 2 follow
onlu either1 or 3 follows.
only either 2 or 3 follows.
only either 1 or 4 follows

ans : 4 follows

30. USMAN

while using the UP UN method iam getting different answer
example:
Statements: SOME AS ARE NOT BS
ALL CS ARE BS
CONCLUSION: SOME AS ARE NOT CS
As per combo rule, it is not in standard form
if we convert second up to pp we can conclude that there is no mediate inference
bcz PN+PP – No conversion but using venn diagram i am getting the conclusion as true

1. Akash

Friend, if you find any method for this, kindly let me know too !!! I have been trying to find a method for PP + PN for a long time, couldn’t get it !! I’d be highly obliged ! :

31. viratian

Statements:
S1: Some states are capitals
S2: No pens are capitals
Conclusion:
1. Some statements are not pens
2. All states are pens
3. Some pens are not states
4. All pens are states

I. Only 1 follows
II. Only 3 follows
III. Either 1 or 2 follows
IV. Either 3 or 4 and 1 follows
V. 1 and 3 follow.

32. vikas

all classes are lions
some birds are classes
all pens are lions
conclusion
no pen is bird
some birds are pens
from 2 and 3 statement no conclusion follows bcoz they having 4 terms(birds classes pens lions) thats y we cant conclude any statement from these two statements. but conclusion 1 is negative 2 is positive and it also particular so either 1 or 2 follows. i hope i m right. but tell me one thing should we always consider those 2 statesments(some birds are classes and all pens are lions to find given conlusion is following or not..? or we should derive more conclusion with the help of first statement?? plz help me

33. V.T

Thanxx MRUNAL …. for being so much helpful…

plz solve ..one question:

statement : 1. some boys are cloud.
2. Gopal is a boy.

conclusion: 1. Gopal is cloud.
2. some boys are not cloud.

34. Aishwarya

Stmt 1: All keys are locks
Stmt 2: Some buttons are not locks.
Conc1: Some buttons are keys
Conc 2: Some buttons are not keys.
Somebody pls solve this using rules.

35. khoda hailyang

I have a doubt regarding UN + UP -> PN rule. I have tried to apply common sense from daily observations.
Suppose we have
1. No birds are insects.[UN]
2. All insects are animals.[UP]
According to the steps, we should have UN + UP = PN i.e. Some birds are not animals [Which is not true in reality]
While in another case
1. No insects are dogs.[UN]
2. All dogs are mammals. [UP]
The conclusion follows as “Some insects are not mammals” [PN] (Which appears true in reality)
I am not very sure with the logic related with this kind of syllogism i.e. UN + UP. I think it should be no conclusion even for UN + UP.

1. Tilak

Read The above conclusion combos again as written C to A means your first Question conclusion is some animals are not birds. and for second some mammals are not insects..

36. amit mishra

can u pls explain that sometime up/un method i s applicable and some time not…i m ver confused which method should i used to solve the question…??? as i did one of question
statements-some pastries are toffees
statement-all toffees are chocolates
conclusion-some chocolates are toffees
conclusion-some toffees are not pastries
solution-
according to up/un method-pp+up=pp(a to c)so ans must become some pastries are chocolates..but ans is given conclusin 1..same ans is comes from vein diagram…..pls suggest me wright ans..

37. lakshmi

Statements: Some birds are goats. Some goats are horses.
Some horses are lions. Some lions are tigers. Conclusions: I. Some tigers are goats. II. No tiger is goat. III. Some lions are birds. IV. No lion is bird. 1) Only either I or II follow 2) Only either III or IV follow 3) Only either I, II, and III or IV follow 4) Only I and III follow 5) None of these

According to me the answer is 2 but the book shows it as 3 socan u help me on hw 1st & 2nd is correct

38. lakshmi

Statements: Some birds are goats. Some goats are horses.
Some horses are lions. Some lions are tigers. Conclusions: I. Some tigers are goats. II. No tiger is goat. III. Some lions are birds. IV. No lion is bird. 1) Only either I or II follow 2) Only either III or IV follow 3) Only either I, II, and III or IV follow 4) Only I and III follow 5) None of these

According to me the answer is 2 but the book shows it as 3 socan u help me on this b/c two particulars cn hv no conclusion .Then how can b 3rd option is correct
III or IV follows-condns satisfied but in this 3rd option “Only either I, II, and III or IV follow” how 1 or 2 satisfied

39. lakshmi

Statements: Some birds are goats. Some goats are horses.
Some horses are lions. Some lions are tigers. Conclusions: I. Some tigers are goats. II. No tiger is goat. III. Some lions are birds. IV. No lion is bird. 1) Only either I or II follow 2) Only either III or IV follow 3) Only either I, II, and III or IV follow 4) Only I and III follow 5) None of these

According to me the answer is 2 but the book shows it as 3 socan u help me on this b/c two particulars cn hv no conclusion .Then how can b 3rd option is correct
III or IV follows-condns satisfied but in this 3rd option “Only either I, II, and III or IV follow” how 1 or 2 satisfied

40. satya

sir kindly give the cases where the rule is not applicable….there we will use venn diagram as another method…

41. ANKITA ZODAPE

how is d ans 1)cea correct in the, cat 1999 question,it is UP+UN=UN , but does not satisfies (A->C) condition ie. in this case (c->a)?