Syllogism: SSC CGL Practice Questions
Q. 1 In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts, read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements. Statements: All dogs are cats. No cat is a bird. Conclusions: I. Some dogs are birds. II. No dog is a bird.
Check Solution
Ans: B
Explanation:
The statements tell us:
1. All dogs are cats. This means every dog is included within the group of cats.
2. No cat is a bird. This means there is no overlap between the groups of cats and birds.
Now let’s analyze the conclusions:
I. Some dogs are birds. This is incorrect. Since all dogs are cats, and no cats are birds, no dogs can be birds.
II. No dog is a bird. This is correct. Since all dogs are cats, and no cats are birds, there can be no dog that is a bird.
Therefore, only conclusion II follows. However, looking at the options it seems there is a mismatch, the closest and most appropriate option would be:
Q. 2 Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements. Statements: Some dogs are cats. All cats are birds. Conclusions: I. Some dogs are birds. II. Some birds are dogs.
Check Solution
Ans: A
Explanation:
Let’s analyze the statements and conclusions using a Venn diagram.
* “Some dogs are cats” means there’s an overlap between the dog and cat circles.
* “All cats are birds” means the cat circle is entirely inside the bird circle.
Now let’s examine the conclusions:
* I. “Some dogs are birds.” Since some dogs are cats, and all cats are birds, there must be an overlap between dogs and birds. Therefore, this conclusion follows.
* II. “Some birds are dogs.” This is the same as conclusion I, just rephrased. Since some dogs are birds, it also means some birds are dogs. Therefore, this conclusion follows.
However, the options provided seem to contradict each other. Conclusion I is equivalent to Conclusion II.
If we consider conclusion I and II together, that means both follow.
Q. 3 Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements. Statements: Some pens are pencils. All pencils are erasers. Conclusions: I. Some pens are erasers. II. All erasers are pencils. III. Some erasers are pens. IV. No pen is an eraser.
Check Solution
Ans: A
Explanation: Let’s analyze the statements and conclusions using a Venn diagram.
* “Some pens are pencils” – This means there is an overlap between the ‘pens’ and ‘pencils’ circles.
* “All pencils are erasers” – This means the ‘pencils’ circle is entirely inside the ‘erasers’ circle.
Now let’s examine the conclusions:
* I. Some pens are erasers: Since some pens are pencils, and all pencils are erasers, it *must* be true that some pens are erasers.
* II. All erasers are pencils: This is false. The pencils are only a *part* of the erasers, not all.
* III. Some erasers are pens: Since some pens are pencils and all pencils are erasers, it must be true that some erasers are pens.
* IV. No pen is an eraser: This is false because conclusion I and III are true.
The conclusions that logically follow are I and III.
Q. 4 Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements. Statements: All dogs are mammals. No mammal is a reptile. All snakes are reptiles. Conclusions: I. No dog is a snake. II. Some snakes are not mammals. III. Some dogs may be snakes.
Check Solution
Ans: B
Explanation:
1. **Analyze the statements:**
– All dogs are mammals. (Dogs are inside the mammal group)
– No mammal is a reptile. (Mammals and reptiles are completely separate groups)
– All snakes are reptiles. (Snakes are inside the reptile group)
2. **Evaluate the conclusions:**
– I. No dog is a snake. Since dogs are mammals, and no mammal is a reptile, and snakes are reptiles, dogs and snakes cannot overlap. This conclusion is correct.
– II. Some snakes are not mammals. All snakes are reptiles, and no reptiles are mammals. Therefore, all snakes are *not* mammals. This conclusion is correct.
– III. Some dogs may be snakes. This conclusion is incorrect. As established in Conclusion I, no dogs are snakes.
3. **Determine the correct option:** The question asks for the conclusions which *logically follow*. Conclusion I and II are valid inferences from the statements, however conclusion III is incorrect.
Q. 5 Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements; Statements: 1. Some cars are buses. 2. All buses are trucks. Conclusions: I. Some cars are trucks. II. Some trucks are buses. III. No car is a truck.
Check Solution
Ans: C
Explanation:
Let’s analyze the statements and conclusions using a Venn diagram approach:
* **Statement 1: Some cars are buses.** This means there’s an overlap between the “cars” and “buses” sets.
* **Statement 2: All buses are trucks.** This means the “buses” set is entirely contained within the “trucks” set.
Now, let’s evaluate the conclusions:
* **I. Some cars are trucks.** Since some cars are buses, and all buses are trucks, then some cars must also be trucks. This conclusion is correct.
* **II. Some trucks are buses.** Because all buses are trucks, some trucks must be buses. This is also correct.
* **III. No car is a truck.** This contradicts the information we derived from the premises. Since some cars *are* trucks, this conclusion is incorrect.
Therefore, only conclusions I and II follow.
Q. 6 Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements. Statements: All dogs are loyal. Rohan is a dog. Conclusions: I. Rohan is loyal. II. Some loyal are dogs.
Check Solution
Ans: D
Explanation: The statements establish that all dogs possess the characteristic of loyalty, and Rohan is identified as a dog. Therefore, Rohan must also be loyal. Conclusion I directly follows from the statements. Conclusion II, stating that some loyal beings are dogs, is also a valid inference, as Rohan (a dog) is loyal, and thus a portion of loyal beings are dogs.
Q. 7 Two statements are given, followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. Assuming the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements. Statements: All dogs are mammals. No mammals are reptiles. Conclusions: I. No dogs are reptiles. II. Some reptiles are dogs.
Check Solution
Ans: D
Explanation:
The statements tell us that dogs are a subset of mammals, and mammals and reptiles do not overlap.
Conclusion I: No dogs are reptiles. This is correct because dogs are mammals and mammals are not reptiles, therefore no dog can be a reptile.
Conclusion II: Some reptiles are dogs. This is incorrect. If no mammals are reptiles, and dogs are mammals, then no dog can be a reptile.
Therefore, only conclusion I is logically correct.
Next Chapter: Time and Distance
Crack SSC CGL – with LearnTheta’s AI Platform!
✅ All Topics at One Place
🤖 Adaptive Question Practice
📊 Progress and Insights