CAT wordpandit English

Deductive logic-No probability involved

IF- Sufficient condition
Only if Necessary but not sufficient condition
If and only if Both
Critical reasoning
Involves probability
An argument is valid only if it is based on deductive logic
CR questions can be broadly divided into certain categories:

Identify the assumption

Strengthen the argument
Weaken the argument
Miscellaneous question types

1. Must be true questions, framed along these lines:

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true?
If the information above is correct, which one of the following conclusions can be properly
drawn on the basis of it?
The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following?
Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the passage?
Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?
Learning through an example of the question type:
Flavonoids are a common component of almost all plants, but a specific variety of flavonoid
in apples has been found to be an antioxidant. Antioxidants are known to be a factor in the
prevention of heart disease.
Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the passage?
(A) A diet composed largely of fruits and vegetables will help to prevent heart disease.
(B) Flavonoids are essential to preventing heart disease.
(C) Eating at least one apple each day will prevent heart disease.
(D) At least one type of flavonoid helps to prevent heart disease.
The first step: identify your task. We need to provide a conclusion. What is our conclusion in
laymen terms? That one could get help in heart disease from a certain type of flavonoid. Not
all types would help but a certain type would for sure. Which option highlights this option of
a one of the types helping us? Option D. the other options are too specific to be the answer,
are they not?
2. Main point of the argument questions
The question is phrased as:
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the
argument?
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the journalists
argument?
Which one of the following most accurately restates the main point of the passage?
The main point of the argument is that

Learning through an example of the question type:

I agree that Hogans actions resulted in grievous injury to Winters. And I do not deny that
Hogan fully realized the nature of his actions and the effects that they would have. Indeed, I
would not disagree if you pointed out that intentionally causing such effects is
reprehensible, other things being equal. But in asking you to concur with me that Hogans
actions not be wholly condemned I emphasize again that Hogan mistakenly believed Winters
to be the robber who had been terrorizing west-side apartment buildings for the past
several months.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the argument?
(A) Hogan should not be considered responsible for the injuries sustained by Winters.
(B) The robber who had been terrorizing west-side apartment buildings should be
considered to be as responsible for Winterss injuries as Hogan.
(C) The actions of Hogan that seriously injured Winters are not completely blameworthy.
(D) Hogan thought that Winters was the person who had been terrorizing west-side
apartment buildings for the last few months.
The main point of the argument is essentially the summary of the paragraph that we need
to work out. Lets keep our approach simple: all we do is first identify the summary in our
words and then we match it with the options. The argument simply states that we cannot
totally blame Hogan as was mistaken and his actions were not done intentionally. Which
option goes by this logic? I guess option C is screaming at us, isnt is?
3. Resolve the paradox questions:
A resolve the paradox question is framed something like this:
Which one of the following, if true, would most effectively resolve the apparent paradox
above?
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy in the
passage above?
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain the puzzling fact cited above?
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to reconcile the discrepancy indicated
above?
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent conflict described
above?
Learning through an example of the question type:
Provinces and states with stringent car safety requirements, including required use of seat
belts and annual safety inspections, have on average higher rates of accidents per kilometer
driven than do provinces and states with less stringent requirements. Nevertheless, most
highway safety experts agree that more stringent requirements do reduce accident rates.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to reconcile the safety experts belief with
the apparently contrary evidence described above?
(A) Annual safety inspections ensure that car tires are replaced before they grow old.
(B) Drivers often become overconfident after their cars have passed a thorough safety
inspection.
(C) The roads in provinces and states with stringent car safety programs are far more
congested and therefore dangerous than in other provinces and states.
(D) Psychological studies show that drivers who regularly wear seat belts often come to
think of themselves as serious drivers, which for a few people discourages reckless driving.
Explanation: The conclusion reached above is confusing for sure. States with stringent law
would obviously have lower accident rates, but alas, that does not happen here. What went
wrong? That is what we have to identify. Lets break down the information given to us: the
accident rates per kilometre are higher in these states. How do we define these rates?
Obviously on the basis of traffic. If the street is crowded with cars and another is empty, the
one with a greater number of cars will have a higher rate of accidents. This gives us the

explanation we need. The more the congestion, the more the accidents per kilometre, and
thus our requirement for stringent laws. This even explains why we have stringent laws in
the first place: to counter the traffic challenge. This is what we do in a paradox question:
break down the question into smaller bits, find the problem part and rectify that. It is only
one part of the argument that is weak and needs some additional support. Identify that
part.
4. Method of reasoning questions:
The method of reasoning questions are structured like the following examples:
The method of the argument is to
The argument proceeds by
The argument derives its conclusion by
Which one of the following describes the technique of reasoning used above?
Which one of the following is an argumentative strategy employed in the argument?
The argument employs which one of the following reasoning techniques?
Learning through an example of the question type:
Garbage in this neighborhood probably will not be collected until Thursday this week.
Garbage is usually collected here on Wednesdays, and the garbage collectors in this city are
extremely reliable. However, Monday was a public holiday, and after a public holiday that
falls on a Monday, garbage throughout the city is supposed to be collected one day later
than usual.
The argument proceeds by
(A) treating several pieces of irrelevant evidence as though they provide support for the
conclusion
(B) indirectly establishing that one thing is likely to occur by directly ruling out all of the
alternative possibilities
(C) providing information that allows application of a general rule to a specific case
(D) generalizing about all actions of a certain kind on the basis of a description of one such
action
If you have a close look at the answer options above, you would realize that all of them use
generic terms. They basically take facts and information provided to us in the argument and
convert into various possible general options. Now the choice in front of us is to make the
best fit. Lets eliminate options. That way is the easiest to solve this question type:
Option 1 is rejected as there is no irrelevant evidence.
Option 2 is ruled out as no alternative possibilities are discussed. Only one type of
information is given, that is when is garbage collected.
Option 4 is rejected as these is no generalization. In fact, the reverse is true. A general rule is
being applied to a specific case. This leads us to the correct answer.
5. Flaw in reasoning question:
The flaw of reasoning questions are structured like the following examples:
Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the arguments reasoning?
The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the ground that the
argument
The reasoning above is flawed because it fails to recognize that
A questionable aspect of the reasoning above is that it
The reasoning in the argument is fallacious because the argument
Learning through an example of the question type:
Some people claim that the values that this country was built on are now being ignored by
modern-day corporations. But this is incorrect. Corporations are purely profit-driven
enterprises, beholden only to their shareholders, and as such they can only assess objects
based on their value.
Identify the flaw in the argument above.

The term value is used in the example above in two different senses: first in a moral or
ethical sense and then in a monetary sense. This shift in meaning undermines the authors
position.
Flaw in reasoning questions demand a quick perception on part of the student. You need to
be able to identify the faulty assumptions made by the author, the introduction of
ambiguous terms & the subtle changes in meaning. In a way, it is about picking up the subtle
nuances in reading.