[Reasoning] 4-Statement Syllogism: Approach, Techniques, explained for SBI PO (High level reasoning) and UPSC CSAT paper 2

SubscribeAptitude159 Comments

Mrunal's Economy Course
  1. Introduction
  2. Recap: 2 statement
  3. Complimentary case
  4. Approaching 4 statement syllogism
  5. Case#1 : Stick, lamps, power, dresses, shirts
  6. Case#2: Bird, Horse, Tiger, Lion & Monkey
  7. Case#3: Bench, Wall, House, Jungle, Road
  8. Case#4: (Complimentary Pairs): Cups, Bottles, Jugs, Plates & Tables
  9. Case#5: (Complimentary Pairs): Chair, Handle, Pots, Mats & Buses

Introduction

  • SBI loves asking 4 statement syllogism questions in its PO exam. (usually 5 questions.)
  • In 2012, UPSC asked 3 statement syllogism in CSAT paper II, and nothing prevents UPSC from asking 4-statement syllogism in future, under its BackbreakingTM move.
  • Therefore, anyone who doesn’t want to dig his/her grave in SBI or UPSC, should thoroughly prepare syllogism.
  • Good news is, no matter whether they ask 2 statement syllogism, 3 statement syllogism, 4 statement syllogism or 50 statement syllogism, our UP-UN method continues to work.
  • However, to quickly and accurately solved 4 statement syllogism, first you must master earlier techniques
Two statement syllogism Click me to learn
Three statement syllogism Click me to learn

Recap: 2 statement

Whenever facing two statement syllogism, our standard operating procedure is:

  1. Two statements, must have only three terms
  2. Classify them into UP, UN, PP or PN.
  3. Two statements must be in the Format A to B then B to C, if not then apply the conversion rules
Type of Statement Valid Conversion Path
  1. Universal Positive (UP)
  2. All cats(A) are dogs (B)
  • Only PP
  • Some Cats (A) are dogs. (B)
  • Some dogs (B) are cats. (A)
  1. A to B
  2. B to A
  1. Universal Negative (UN)
  2. No Cats(A) are dogs (B)
  • PN :Some Dogs (B) are not Cats (A).
B to A
  • UN: No Dogs (B) are cats. (A)
  1. Particular Positive (PP)
  2. Some cats (A) are dogs (B)
  • Only PP: Some dogs (B) are cats(A)
B to A
  1. Particular Negative (PN)
  • Not possible.
  1. Now apply the combo rules. Unless specifically mentioned, conversion is A to C.

No conclusion combos

Yes 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. (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)

Complimentary case

  • Incase you get a no-conclusion combo, BUT any of the answer choice says “either ** or ** follows.” In that case you’ve to check for complimentary cases. (this is critical for SBI PO, since often the 4 statement conclusion have complimentary case situation).
  • For complimentary case to be valid, two conditions must be met:

Condition #1: Two answer choices have same subject and predicate.

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

Condition#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.” (to see actual question related to the complimentary pair situation, check the case number 4 and 5 given in the later part of this article.)

Approaching 4 statement syllogism

  • Here you pick up conclusion one at a time, find its parents.
  • Apply chain formula and see if it leads to the given conclusion. (pretty much the same thing that we do in three statement syllogism click me)
  • Anyways without much ado, let’s start solving 4-statement syllogism questions from SBI PO 2010 exam

Case#1 : Stick, lamps, power, dresses, shirts

This is a really cheap and easy question.

Question statements Subject predicate Type
1 1. some sticks are lamps PP
2 2. some flowers are lamps PP
3 3. some lamps are dresses PP
4 4. all dresses are shirts UP
conclusion statements
1 some shirts are sticks PP
2 some shirts are flowers PP
3 some flowers are sticks PP
4 some dresses are sticks PP

Answer choice

  1. None follows
  2. Only 1
  3. Only 2
  4. Only 3
  5. Only 4.

Approach

  • You can start with one conclusion at a time, find its parents and then apply combo rules.
  • But if you look at it carefully: 3 out of 4 question statements are Particular Positive (PP). So if you pick any two of them, PP+PP=no conclusion.
  • Fourth question statement is UP.  UP+PP=PP if this is intermediate conclusion, it won’t give any final conclusion when paired with any other question statement because PP + PP = no conclusion.
  • If situation requires you to convert UP (=can only be converted into PP), then again PP+PP=no conclusion.
  • So with that thought in mind, check four conclusion statement, you’ll see none of their parents can give conclusion.
  • Therefore answer is (A) none follow.

Case#2: Bird, Horse, Tiger, Lion & Monkey

Question statement Subject predicate Type
1 All Birds are Horses UP
2 all Horses are Tigers UP
3 Some Tigers are Lions PP
4 Some Lions are Monkeys PP
conclusion statements
1 Some Tigers are Horses PP
2 Some Monkeys are Birds PP
3 Some Tigers are Birds PP
4 Some Monkeys are Horses PP

Answer choice

  1. Only 1 and 3
  2. Only 1, 2 and 3
  3. Only 2, 3 and 4
  4. Only 1, 2, 3 and 4
  5. None follows.

Approach

  • As you can see conclusion #3 is reappearing in option A to D. so first I’ll check conclusion #3. If it turns out to be false then my effort is saved, I’ll directly tick (E).

Checking conclusion #3

3 Some Tigers are Birds PP

If this conclusion is valid, who’re its parents?

1 All Birds_A are Horses_B UP
2 all Horses_B are Tigers_C UP
  • Ok this is in standard format: A to B then B to C.
  • Apply combo rule: when UP is merged in UP, its size doesn’t increase (UP+UP=UP, A to C). so my conclusion is All birds_A are tigers_C. I’ll reconvert this (UP to PP), so some tigers are birds. This matches with the conclusion number #3.
  • So conclusion #3 is valid. So option E is eliminated.
  • Now I’ll have to check other conclusions as well. Anyways, now let’s check all other conclusions in serial order (1, 2, 4)

Checking conclusion #1

Concl.1 Some Tigers are Horses PP

If this is legit, who’re its parents?

Just one:

Q.Statement 2 all Horses are Tigers UP

I can convert this! (UP to PP) so some tigers are horses. So conclusion #1=valid.

Checking conclusion #2

2 Some Monkeys are Birds PP

If this is valid, who’re its parents?

1 All Birds are Horses UP
2 all Horses are Tigers UP
3 Some Tigers are Lions PP
4 Some Lions are Monkeys PP

I’ll reorder so it makes more sense

4 Some Lions are Monkeys PP
3 Some Tigers are Lions PP
2 all Horses are Tigers UP
1 All Birds are Horses UP
  • Ok we are facing 4 statement chain. We’ve to pick two at a time get intermediate conclusions, pair them with next statement and keep moving.
  • But today is my lucky day, you see first two statements are PP + PP= no conclusion. So we can’t proceed further. And answer choice doesn’t contain any “either or”. So we don’t need to check complimentary case either. That means conclusion #2 is invalid. Our precious time and effort is saved.

So far we’ve done following

Conclusion number Valid/not?
3 Valid
1 Valid
2 Invalid.

Accordingly, Answer choice

  1. Only 1 and 3
  2. Only 1, 2 and 3
  3. Only 2, 3 and 4
  4. Only 1, 2, 3 and 4
  5. None follows

Final answer (A) Only 1 and 3 follow.

Case#3: Bench, Wall, House, Jungle, Road

Question statement Subject predicate Type
1 Some Bench Are Wall PP
2 All Wall Are House UP
3 Some House Are Jungle PP
4 All jungle Are Road UP
Conclusion Statements
1 some Roads Are Benches PP
2 Some Jungles Are Walls PP
3 Some Houses Are Benches PP
4 some Roads Are Houses PP

Answer choices

  1. Only 1 and 2
  2. Only 1 and 3
  3. Only 3 and 4
  4. Only 2, 3 and 4
  5. None follows.

Approach

To save time and effort, I am going to test only 2 and 4. Let’s see if I can get lucky!

Checking conclusion statement #2

2 Some Jungle Are Wall PP

If this is valid conclusion, who’re its parents (question statements)?

2 All Wall Are House UP
3 Some House Are Jungle PP
  • Cool, already in standard format A to B then B to C.
  • And UP’s politicians hate giving particular statements so UP+PP=no conclusion.
  • So conclusion #2 is invalid, that means answer choice A and D are eliminated. Let’s see what is left in the answer choices:
  1. Only 1 and 2
  2. Only 1 and 3
  3. Only 3 and 4
  4. Only 2, 3 and 4
  5. None follows.

Ok now let’s check conclusion #4.

Checking conclusion statement #4

4 some Roads Are Houses PP

If this is valid conclusion, who are its parents (question statements)?

3 Some House Are Jungle PP
4 All jungle Are Road UP
  • Good, already in standard format: A to B then B to C. so directly apply the combo rule.
  • 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)
  • PP+UP=PP. (A to C)
  • Therefore my conclusion is Some Houses are roads. And PP can be converted into PP. So Some roads are houses = also valid.
  • So conclusion #4 is valid. Let’s check our answer choices
  1. Only 1 and 2
  2. Only 1 and 3
  3. Only 3 and 4
  4. Only 2, 3 and 4
  5. None follows.

Final answer: C, only 3 and 4 follows.

Case#4: (Complimentary Pairs): Cups, Bottles, Jugs, Plates & Tables

Question statement Subject predicate Type
1 All Cups are Bottles UP
2 Some Bottles are Jugs PP
3 No Jug is Plate UN
4 some Plates are tables PP
Conclusion Statements
1 Some Tables are Bottles PP
2 Some Plates are Cups PP
3 No Table is Bottle UN
4 Some jugs are cups PP

ANSWER choice

  1. Only 1 follows
  2. Only 2
  3. Only 3
  4. Only 4
  5. Either 1 or 3 follows.

Approach

Let’s start with conclusion 1.

1 Some Tables are Bottles PP

If conclusion 1 is valid then who’re its parents (question statements)?

2 Some Bottles are Jugs PP
3 No Jug is Plate UN
4 some Plates are tables PP

I’ll rearrange the order

2 Some Bottles_A are Jugs_B PP
3 No Jug_B Is Plate_C UN
4 some Plates_C are Tables_D PP
  • Now it is a three statement syllogism.
  • Already in standard format. So, First combine 2+3.
  • PP+UN=PN. (A to C)
  • Some Bottles_A are not plates_C.  (PN)
  • That’s my intermediate conclusion. Now I’ll combine it with question statement number 4.
Intermediate conclusion Some Bottles_A Are not Plate_C PN
Q. statement #4 some Plates_C are Tables_D PP
  • Two particulars = no conclusion.
  • Ok so, conclusion #1=cannot be concluded definitely.
  • But wait, look at answer choice #4: either 1 or 3 follows. So this could be a case of complimentary pairs.
  • Let’s relook at conclusion statement #1 and #3.
Subject Predicate
1 Some Tables are Bottles PP
3 No Table is Bottle UN

Apply the checklist for complimentary case.

  1. Two answer choices have same subject and predicate?= YES
  2. The answer choice combo must be either of these three
    1. Uttar Pradesh (UP) + Pritish Nandy (PN)
    2. PP + Pritish Nandy (PN)
    3. PP + United Nations (UN)

Yes, it is combo number III (PP+UN). So final answer is either 1 or 3 follows.

Case#5: (Complimentary Pairs): Chair, Handle, Pots, Mats & Buses

Question statements are Type
1. Some chairs are Handles PP
2. All Handles are Pots UP
3. All Pots are Mats UP
4. Some Mats are Buses PP
Conclusion Statement
1. Some buses are handles PP
2. Some mats are chairs PP
3. No bus is handle UN
4. Some mats are handles PP

Answer choices

  1. Only 1,2,3 follow
  2. Only 2,3 and 4 follow
  3. Either 1 or 3 AND 2 follow
  4. Either 1 or 3 AND 4 follow
  5. Either 1 or 3 AND 2 and 4 follow

Approach

Take a look at c,d,e all of them contain “Either 1 or 3”. So we’ve to check for complimentary cases. Given conclusions

1. some buses are handles pp
3. no buses is handle un
  • Ok this both have some subject and predicate.
  • And they’re in form of PP+UN. So, Yes, they’re fit for complimentary case= Either 1 or 3 follows. Let’s see our answer choices again:
  1. Only 1,2,3 follow
  2. Only 2,3 and 4 follow
  3. Either 1 or 3 AND 2 follow
  4. Either 1 or 3 AND 4 follow
  5. Either 1 or 3 AND 2 and 4 follow
  • So answer can be C/D/E. Let’s Start with answer choice C.
  • C says “either 1 or 3 AND 2”
  • We have already checked that either 1 or 3 is valid.
  • Now let’s test conclusion statement number 2
2. some Mats Are chairs PP

If this is valid then who’re its parents (question statements)?

1. some Chairs(A) are Handles(B) PP
2. all Handles(B) are Pots(C) UP
3. all Pots(C) are Mats(D) UP

Ok now let’s pair up 1 and 2

1. some Chairs(A) Are Handles(B) PP
2. all Handles(B) Are Pots(C) UP
  • Are they in standard format A to B B to C? yes.
  • Apply rules. PP + UP.
  • 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)
  • Therefore, PP + UP = PP (A to C)
  • Intermediate Conclusion statement is Some chairs(A) are pots(C)
  • Combine intermediate conclusion with q.statement #3.
Some chairs(A) are pots(C) PP
3. all Pots(C) are Mats(D) UP
  • Are they in std. format? yes they’re in standard format, (A to C C to D)
  • Apply rules. PP + UP = PP (A to D).
  • Our conclusion: Some chairs (A) are mats(D)==>convert Some mats are chairs (PP to PP).
  • Conclusion statement #2 said: some mats are chairs.
  • Yes so conclusion statement #2 is legit. So far our situation is
  1. Only 1,2,3 follow
  2. Only 2,3 and 4 follow
  3. Either 1 or 3 AND 2 follow
  4. Either 1 or 3 AND 4 follow
  5. Either 1 or 3 AND 2 and 4 follow
  • Now let’s check conclusion statement #4.
4.some mats are handles PP

Find its parents.

2. all Handles_A Are Pots_B UP
3. all Pots_B are Mats_C UP
  • 2+3= already in std format, UP+UP =UP merged with UP, size doesn’t hence.
  • So UP+UP=UP (A to C) very easy. Conclusion will be All handles are mats (UP).
  • But fourth conclusion is some mats are handles. No problem, we’ll convert our conclusion (rule UP–>PP).
  • So, All handles are mats (UP) => Some mats are handles.
  • Therefore, conclusion number 4 is also correct. Therefore Final answer: (e)  Either 1 or 3 AND 2 and 4 follow.

For more articles on reasoning and aptitude, visit Mrunal.org/aptitude

Indian History Freedom Struggle Pratik Nayak

159 Comments on “[Reasoning] 4-Statement Syllogism: Approach, Techniques, explained for SBI PO (High level reasoning) and UPSC CSAT paper 2”

  1. Sir…economic survey please…atleast the crucial chapters…

  2. Thanks mrunal

  3. excellent article as usual..Sir eagerly waiting for remaining chapters of economic survey…

  4. economic survey please……

  5. Sir,

    1.Alternative solution to ” Google reader ” (online news) as it will be going to phase out in coming july?

  6. economic survey…….:)

  7. Mrunal… ur articles are really helpful…

    A request .. in case u can post some Eco-surevy articles on priority…

    In case u are occupied somewhere… it would be gr8 if u can reply to this and inform.. so that I can start working on it… considering time is less…

    Hope u will understand
    Thanks for the help…

  8. Hi Sir,
    I have a query regarding preparation for GS. Actually I have started following PIB website recently and found it immensely useful. More so if the Mains pattern remains as was notified. I am trying to cover the backlog from the site but its taking too much time.
    Can you please provide some suggestions regarding efficiently covering PIB?
    Thanks in advance.

  9. Economic survey plz

  10. Sir for syllogism am familiar with Venn diagram method. . Can i follow the same or this U P U N method Will be easy . . Suggest me sir. .

  11. please anybody tell me is notification of the new changes in mains has been kept in abeyance for compulsory english only or is it for the entire new pattern? what i mean by this is that is the new GS pattern and change in optional again change or is it fixed? please answer

  12. Part II registration of Civil Service(pre) @ upsconline.nic.in is facing server problem @ page is not opening

    Is any one of you friends facing the same problem ? , please suggest any solution

    1. give it a day off. may be the serverr is very busy, it happens,don’t take tension. gd lck

  13. can any one tell me how to print these articles ? i am not getting how to print ? please !

    1. hi
      there is option below the article for PRINT PDF just next wer we start comments chek it on bt it needs chrome

  14. Hi Mrunal

    For condition 1 in complimentary pair

    Not applicable
    Some Politicians are honest.
    No Honest are Politicians

    You said it is not applicable, but immediate inference for second premise is No Politician is Honest

    If rewrite, then both subject and predicate are same

    Please clarify….Why no conversion is allowed here ???

    Regards
    Vinod

    1. that is true but if they’ve given the answer choice in following manner
      question statement:
      1. ****
      2. ****
      conclusion statement:
      I.Some Politicians are honest.
      II.No Honest are Politicians.
      answer choices
      a. ****
      b. ****
      c. either I or II follows
      d. ****
      —————-
      in that case we cannot use complimentary pair because conclusion I and II donot have same subject and same predicate in the answer choice.

      1. Hi Mrunal,

        I understand what you r trying to say is that we can’t choose this option as in the conclusion we can use the conversion rule. But I was going through M K Pandey book and on Page 348 they give a explanation that it is a valid conclusion as we can even convert the conclusions. Therefore there is a confusion gong on which one of the solution is right ie. can we convert the conclusions vs. can we not convert the conclusions to get the complimentary pairs.

        Thanks,
        Pankaj Arora

      2. statements–
        1. Some books are glasses.
        2. Some glasses are waters.
        Conclusions–
        1. No books are waters.
        2. Some waters are books.
        Options–
        1. Only 1 follows
        2. Only 2 follows.
        3. Both follow
        4. Either of them follows
        5. None of d above follows.

        what will be correct answer?

  15. Sir,

    Please provide me some solution for this regarding Syllogism questions:

    According to you v/s According TO RS Aggarwal Book

    1. (A->B)UN+(B->C)PP/UN ->(C->A)PN , Aggarwal says (A->C)PN
    2.Complementary pair UN&PN, PP&PN,PP&UN v/s Aggarwal saying UP&UN also a complimentary pair
    3. Complementary pair have same sub & predicate i.e (A->B)PP&(A->B)UN v/s
    Aggarwal says (A->B)PP&(B->A)UN

    Regards.

  16. such a awasome……..

  17. after Interviews many stopped using the blog?

  18. A very nice website……………..hats off to mrunal…….

  19. Mrunalgi,
    please provide syllogism approach using ven-diagram techniq….

  20. nice post sir thanx

  21. sir upsc ne apna notification withheld kar diya h to mains exam ka syllabus kya rahega ab……. kya exam k date change ho jayegi pre k liye pls help sir

  22. sir
    i nead tips for preparing for lic aao exam

  23. Mrunal Sir,
    Great article….plz write an article on how to solve the syllogism of type:
    being Possibility, at least some
    plz sir , as this is a vogue now a days to ask this type of question….

    sample question:

    Statements
    some papers are boards.
    No board is card.
    conclusions
    I. No card is a paper.
    II. Some papers are cards.
    Conclusions
    I. All cards being papers is a possibility.
    II. All boards being papers is a possibility.
    Thanks is advance….

  24. sir,please economic survey and budget highlights ….:).

  25. Bro… U… R…wait for it.. Awesommmmee….
    When r u opening a coaching Institute????????

  26. Sir,

    Though I folloe the books recommended by you for Reasoning. However, I find your posts easy to understand and grasp.

    Sir, Could you please post something on Input-output problems.

    Regards,
    Harihar

  27. hi mrunal,
    as your article about syllogism is grt but i hav confusion that something stmt are not easy like ALL, SOME, no……..they started like name of person, some other prefix like frustrated…kindly clearify regarding this….if possible……bcoz now most of the stmt are not started by simple all, no, some …

  28. While solving questions from trishna publication, answers are not matching using your approach. Could you please see question no 2 at page 1.166

  29. Hi Mrunal Sir

    Kindly assist how to tackle Data Interpretation and Analysis
    in SBI PO (one complete section is devoted to this).

    Kindly suggest a relevant book for same.

    thanks in anticipation.

  30. HI MRUNAL….IN CASE 3…CONCLUSION 2;SOME JUNGLES ARE WALLS is correct…please check nd let me know..answer shud be 2,3 d 4

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *