Introduction

There are two main types of Syllogism question 3-Statements Question Statement A. All cats are dogs Question Statement: B. some pigs are cats I. All cats are dogs C. no dogs are birdsConclusion II. All dogs are birdsConclusion: I. some cats are dogs I. Some cats are birds II. no birds are cats II. Some 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). (Theyre mere an extension of the concepts explained in this article, so first master the 2-statement technique here.)

2-Statements

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

1. 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.

2. 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.

3. 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 nonCAT questions.

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

Basics 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 doesnt matter what word is given: Table, Chair, Raja, Kalmadi, Kanimozhi or Madhu Koda first term is subject and second term is predicate. Lets 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. Lets 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. Universal (positive or negative) Some, many, a few, quite a few, not many, very Particular (positive little, most of, almost, generally, often, freqently, etc. or negative) All, every, any, none, not a single, only etc.

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 Answer

statements 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 1. First term>Middle Term 2. B>C 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 This must be converted into 1. A>B 1. A>B 2. C>B 2. B>C Given question statements are This must be converted into 1. B>A 1. A>B 2. B>C 2. B>C Ok, so how to convert the statements? Universal Positive (UP) Valid conversions Some Cats are dogs Given Statement: All Cats are Dogs Some dogs are cats Given Statement Type Particular Positive (PP) 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 Some dogs are not Particular Negative Dogs cats (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=cant 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. Please note: 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. Answer choices 1. Some Honest men are not Politicians. 2. All Honest men are not politician 3. Some Honest men are politicians. 4. None of Above. (Please donot read further, without solving above question.) 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 1. Some Honest men are not Politicians. 2. No Honest men are politicians. 3. Some Honest men are politicians. 4. None of Above. Thought process Particular negative (PN), hence eliminate. Universal Negative, hence eliminate PP hence this is correct answer. not applicable because C is the correct answer.

In case you are wondering, Q. Some politicians are honest men. In above case, cant the answer be A: Some honest men are not politicians? Well, if you go by Venn Diagram method, itll lead to two cases hence it is doubtful. Case #1 Data 1. Sardar Patel 2. Lal Bahadur Shastri 3. Raja 4. Kalmadi 1. Sardar Patel 2. Lal Bahadur Shastri

Subject (Politicians)

Predicate (Honest Men)

In above situation, can you say Some honest men are not politicians? Well you cant say that. Because both Honest men (Sardar and Shastri) are in politician set. Case #2 Data

Subject (Politicians)

1. Sardar Patel 2. Lal Bahadur Shastri 3. Raja 4. Kalmadi 1. Sardar Patel 2. Lal Bahadur Shastri 3. Bhagat Singh 4. ChandraSekhar Azad

Predicate (Honest Men)

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 doesnt 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 Universal Positive (UP) All cats(A) are dogs (B) Valid Conversion Only PP Some Cats (A) are dogs. (B) Some dogs (B) are cats. (A) Path A to B B to A

Universal Negative (UN) PN :Some Dogs (B) are not Cats (A). No Cats(A) are dogs (B) Particular Positive (PP) Some cats (A) are dogs (B) Particular Negative (PN) Only PP: Some dogs (B) are cats(A) B to A Not possible. UN: No Dogs (B) are cats. (A) B to A

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 doesnt 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 lets try some examples Question statements Conversion? 1. All Cats are Already in standard format (A to B and then B to dogs(B) C) 2. Some dogs(B) are hence no need to convert. not pigs. No need to convert any statement. 1. Some dogs(B) are Just exchange the position of first and second not pigs. statement. 2. All Cats are 1. All Cats are dogs(B) dogs(B) 2. Some dogs(B) are not pigs. 1. All Cats are dogs Have to convert, because not in standard (B) format.1.All cats(A) are dogs(B) 2. All pigs 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 Particular Positive (PP) No conclusion Universal Positive (UP) Particular Negative (PN) No conclusion Universal Negative (UN) No conclusion Universal Negative (UN) Particular Negative (PN) No conclusion Particular Positive (PP) No conclusion Particular Positive (PP) Particular Negative (PN) No conclusion Particular Negative (PN) Any other (UP, UN, PP, PN) No conclusion ^does it look difficult? Not really. Lets condense this table into mug-up rules. 1. UPs 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. That concept is called Complimentary pairs. Well learn about it at the bottom of this article. For the moment, lets not complicate the matters with complimentary pairs. Ok back to topic, when you face a Two-statement syllogism question? youll follow these steps: 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 weve to think about what will be the conclusion(s)?

Conclusive-Combos
If youve followed above steps, then question statements in the format A to B and then B to C. First statement (A to Second statement (B Conclusion B) to C) Universal Positive Universal Positive (UP) (A (UP) to C) Universal Positive (UP) Universal Negative Universal Negative (UN) (A (UN) to C) Universal positive (UP) Universal Negative Particular Negative (PN). (C (UN) to A) Particular Positive (PP) Universal Positive Particular Positive (PP) (A (UP) to C) Particular Positive (PP) Universal Negative Particular Negative (PN) (A (UN) 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). Lets condense this table into mug-up rules as well. Conclusive-Combos 1. UP+UP=UP 2. UP+UN=UN In your head, visualize If Uttar Pradesh meets Uttar Pradesh, then its size doesnt increase. If Uttar Pradesh meets United Nations then its size increases and it becomes United Nations. 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) When Mr.PP observes the universe via NASA telescope, his mood becomes positive or negative

3. UN+ (UP/PP)=PN

4. PP+

(UP/UN)=PP/PN

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 Answer a. None of the conclusion follows b. All conclusions follow c. Only 1, 3 and 4 follow d. Only 2 and 3 follow (I suggest you pause here. First try to solve it on your own, without directly reading the solution. If youve 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 theyre in standard format (A to B and then B to

C): Check yes theyre. Hence conversion is not required. 1. All men(A) are women. (B) (UP) 2. All women(B) are crazy.(C) (UP) Third step, classify the statements. 1. All men are women. Universal Positive (UP) 2. All women are crazy. Universal Positive (UP) Fourth step: check the combo for question statements.

Well, since it is UP+UP= its size doesnt increase. Hence conclusion should be UP. (A to C) meaning All men(A) are crazy.(C) Check the answer statements.

1. All Men are crazy

Correct.

Recall that conversion table.Universal Positive (UP) can be converted only into Particular Positive (PP). 2. All the crazy Since All men are crazy => Some Crazy are men. But we cannot say All crazy are men. So this option are men 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! 3. Some of the crazy are Correct because of conversion table men 4. Some of the crazy are Given question statement : All women are crazy. (Universal positive). If we apply conversion table

women

(UP=> PP) then Some Crazy are women. Hence this statement is also correct.

Final answer (C): only 1, 3 and 4 follow If youre 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 Answer choices a. only conclusion one follows b. only conclusion two follows c. either conclusion one or conclusion two follows d. 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 dont 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 UPs 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. Now check the Answer statements 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.

Final answer: (D) neither follows.

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) a. Apples are not sweet b. Some apples are sweet c. All sweets are tasty d. Some apples are not tasty e. No apple is tasty answer choices 1. 2. 3. 4. cea bdc cbd eac

solution and approach weve to check the given options one by one. Option (i). CEA. Meaning weve 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. Final answer (i) CEA

DemoQ: Working mother nurses (CAT)

question statement answer choices a. No mother is a nurse. b. Some Nurses like to work 1. ABE c. No woman is prude 2. CED d. Some prude are also nurses 3. FEB e. Some nurses are women 4. BEF f. All women like to work 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 C (Statement I) E (Statement II) D (conclusion) Statement Type No woman is prude Universal negative Some nurses are women Particular positive Some prude are also Particular positive nurses

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 Some nurses are women(B) Universal negative 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, cant be converted to PP. Hence false. iii.FEB F (Statement I) E (Statement II) B (conclusion) Statement Type All women like to work Universal positive UP Some nurses are women Particular positive PP Some nurses like to Particular positive PP work

three terms =yes. Standard form=no. but no need to convert, just exchange position of statement I and II. Some nurses(A) are Particular positive PP women(B) All women(B) like to work Universal positive UP (C) 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 a. all dinosaurs are prehistoric creatures. Water buffaloes are not dinosaurs. Water buffaloes are not prehistoric creatures b. all politicians are frank. No frank people are crocodiles. No crocodiles are politicians c. no diamond is quartz. No opal is quartz. Diamonds are opals. d. All monkeys like bananas. Some Joes like bananas. Some Joes are monkeys. Answer choice i. Only C ii. Only B iii. Only A and D iv. Only B and C Approach Three terms yes. Standard format =No.Both question statements are Universal negative. We can convert C. Diamonds, either of them, into UN or PN. But in any case, both Quartz, Opals. question statements will remain negative. And Two negatives=no conclusion. So C is not possible. Hence answer choice (i) and (iv) eliminated. Already in three terms standard format.UP+UN=size B. Frank enlarged and becomes UN. politicians and So conclusion should be No crocodile is politician so crocodiles this statement is correct. Hence answer choice (ii).

Final answer: (ii) only B. 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 weve to convert them according to conversion table. Here are some special cases. Given Question statement

None but Politicians are honest. No one else but Politicians are honest. Only politicians are honest. Politicians alone are honest

Conversion (all applicable to all given question statements) 1. All honest(people) are politicians

Type UP

2. No non-politician is honest. 3. No honest (people) are non- UN politicians. 4. Some politicians are honest PP

Second concept:

Complimentary pairs
Earlier we saw there are five no-conclusion combos 1. UPs 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. Answer choice a. Only 1 follows b. Only 2 follows c. Either 1 or 2 follows d. 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 Politicians 5. Sardar Patel 6. Lal Bahadur Shastri 7. Raja 8. Kalmadi 9. Sheila In this case#1: some politicians (Sardar and Shastri) are honest. So conclusion (1) may be possible. Case#2 Politicians Males honest Males 1. Sardar Patel 2. Lal Bahadur Shastri 3. Raja 4. Kalmadi 5. Bhagat Singh 6. ChandraSekhar Azad honest 1. Sardar Patel 2. Lal Bahadur Shastri 3. Bhagat Singh 4. ChandraSekhar Azad 5. Sarojini Naidu 6. Mother Teresa

1. Raja 2. Kalmadi 3. Sheila

1. Raja 2. Kalmadi 3. Bhagat Singh 4. ChandraSekhar Azad

1. Bhagat Singh 2. ChandraSekhar Azad 3. Sarojini Naidu 4. Mother Teresa

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. Youve 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 1. Some Politicians are honest.2. No honest.2. No Politicians are Honest are Politicians.In first statement, honestBecause both have subject=Politician but in second common subject (politician) and statement, subject= Honest. Hence common predicate (honest) complemantary case not possible. 2). The answer choice combo must be either of these three Answer choice combo Uttar Pradesh (UP) + Pritish Nandy (PN) PP + Pritish Nandy (PN) example 1. All Politicians are honest. 2. Some Politicians arenot honest 1. Some Politicians are honest.

PP + United Nations (UN)

2. Some Politicians arenot honest 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 thats our B. 1. All Dogs(B) are Cats. 2. Some Dogs(B) are Pigs. We can convert it via two routes Route #2 Well re-order the statements. (that is Just convert the first interchange thee position of both statements) statement. 1. Some dogs(B) are pigs 1. Some Cats are dogs. 2. All Dogs(B) are Cats (Rule: UP to PP) Now well convert the first statement. 2. Some Dogs are pigs. 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: weve 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 dont usually arise in most of the questions). Route #1

Tricky Situations: Priority order

Consider this scenario Question statements 1. All women(B) are birds 2. Some women(B) are tree Conclusion 1. Some birds are tree 2. All 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. Since question statements are not in standard format (A to B then B to C), hence well convert first statement. (UP to PP)After conversion 1. Some birds(A) are women (B) 2. Some women(B) are tree Both question statements are particular, hence final answer=No conclusion. (please note: this approach is wrong, because weve not followed the priority order). Now the correct approach The priority order for Statement conversion is PP>UN>UP.Meaning, if there are two question statements, and weve to convert one of them to make it a standard format=> then well convert Particular CO positive statement first. R So in the given case R 1. All women(B) are birds E 2. Some women(B) are tree C Convert second statement. (PP to PP) T 1. All women(B) are birds. 2. Some trees are women(B).

WR O N G

Now exchange positions of question statements 1. Some trees are women(B). (PP) 2. All women(B) are birds. (UP) Now theyre in standard format, apply combo rule: PP+UP=PP (Nasa telescope rule!) Hence conclusion is Some 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 youre getting PP+PP= no conclusion after conversion.

Tricky Situations: 1-Statement Conclusion

Question statements 1. All the flowers are leaves.(B) (UP) 2. Some leaves(B) are birds (PP) Conclusion 1. Some birds are flowers 2. Some 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 Pradeshs politicians hate particular statements. But heres the catch. Observe the conclusion statements carefully Conclusion statement 1. Some birds are flowers Thought process Not possible because combo rule.

first question statement says All flowers are leaves. If 2. Some you apply the conversion rule UP->PP, thenAll flowers leaves are are leaves=> Some leaves are flowers. Hence this flowers 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) Cant do. 3. Classify the Question statement (UP, UN, PP, PN) 4. Apply the combo rules on Question statements. No conclusion 1. UPs 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. Yes conclusion 1. If Uttar Pradesh meets Uttar Pradesh, then its size doesnt 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

5. Two particulars=no conclusion.

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.