Question 1

Statements:
1. No politicians are saints.
2. Some honest people are saints.

Conclusion: Some honest people are not politicians.

Is the conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion IS valid. From Premise 2, some honest people are saints. From Premise 1, no politicians are saints (i.e., saints and politicians have no overlap). Therefore, those honest people who are saints cannot be politicians. Hence, some honest people are not politicians.

Question 2

Statements:
1. All teachers are educated.
2. Some educated people are doctors.

Conclusion: Some doctors are teachers.

Is the conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion is NOT valid. From the given statements, we know all teachers are educated, and some educated people are doctors. However, this does not guarantee that any of those doctors who are educated are also teachers. The educated doctors could be a completely separate group from teachers.

Question 3

Statements:
1. All fruits are healthy.
2. All apples are fruits.

Conclusion: All apples are healthy.

Is the conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion IS valid. This is a classic categorical syllogism (Barbara form). Since all apples are fruits, and all fruits are healthy, it logically follows that all apples are healthy.

Question 4

Statements:
1. No reptiles are mammals.
2. All snakes are reptiles.

Conclusion: No snakes are mammals.

Is the conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion IS valid. Since all snakes are reptiles, and no reptiles are mammals, it logically follows that no snakes are mammals. This is a valid negative syllogism.

Question 5

Statements:
1. Some athletes are vegetarians.
2. All vegetarians are health-conscious.

Conclusion: All athletes are health-conscious.

Is the conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

The conclusion is NOT valid. We know some athletes are vegetarians, and all vegetarians are health-conscious. However, this only tells us that SOME athletes (those who are vegetarians) are health-conscious. The other athletes may or may not be health-conscious.

Question 6

Statements:
1. All birds have wings.
2. Some animals with wings are not birds.

Conclusion: Which of the following must be true?

Either: Some animals with wings are birds, OR No animals with wings are birds.

Accepted Answer

The conclusion 'Some animals with wings are birds' must be true. From Premise 1, all birds have wings, so at least some animals with wings are birds (namely, all the birds). Premise 2 confirms that some winged animals are not birds, but this doesn't negate the fact that some winged animals ARE birds. Therefore, the first part of the either/or is correct.

Question 7

Statements:
1. All poets are creative.
2. No creative person is lazy.
3. Some writers are lazy.

Conclusion: Either all writers are poets, or some writers are not creative.

Which statement best describes the validity of this conclusion?

Accepted Answer

This tests understanding of 'Either/Or' conclusions and their relationship to categorical syllogisms.

Question 8

Statements:
1. All teachers are educated.
2. Some educated people are not disciplined.

Conclusion: Some teachers are not disciplined.

Which of the following is true about the above conclusion?

Accepted Answer

This tests the student's understanding of the limits of syllogistic deduction when 'Some' premises are involved.

Question 9

Statements:
1. No reptile is a mammal.
2. All snakes are reptiles.
3. Some cold-blooded animals are snakes.

Conclusion: Some cold-blooded animals are not mammals.

Is the conclusion valid?

Accepted Answer

This tests chaining of syllogisms and the correct application of 'No' and 'Some' quantifiers.

Question 10

Statements:
1. All fruits are nutritious.
2. Some nutritious things are expensive.
3. No vegetable is a fruit.

Conclusion: Some vegetables are not nutritious.

Is the conclusion logically valid?

Accepted Answer

This tests the ability to distinguish between what is possible and what is logically necessary in syllogisms.

Question 11

Statements:
1. All honest people are trustworthy.
2. Some employees are not trustworthy.
3. No dishonest person is an employee.

Conclusion: Some employees are not honest.

Which of the following best evaluates this conclusion?

Accepted Answer

This tests the ability to chain multiple syllogisms and correctly apply negation and quantifiers.

Question 12

Statements:
1. All philosophers are critical thinkers.
2. Some critical thinkers are not scientists.
3. No scientist is a philosopher.

Which of the following conclusions is definitely true?
A) All philosophers are scientists.
B) Some philosophers are not scientists.
C) All critical thinkers are philosophers.
D) Some scientists are philosophers.

Accepted Answer

From Statement 1: All philosophers are critical thinkers (Philosophers ⊂ Critical thinkers). From Statement 3: No scientist is a philosopher (Scientists ∩ Philosophers = ∅). Therefore, since all philosophers are critical thinkers AND no scientist is a philosopher, it logically follows that some critical thinkers (the philosophers) are not scientists. This is the only valid conclusion.

Question 13

Statements:
1. No reptile is a mammal.
2. All snakes are reptiles.
3. Some cold-blooded animals are reptiles.

Which of the following conclusions is definitely true?
A) All snakes are mammals.
B) No snake is a mammal.
C) Some snakes are cold-blooded animals.
D) All cold-blooded animals are snakes.

Accepted Answer

From Statement 2: All snakes are reptiles (Snakes ⊂ Reptiles). From Statement 1: No reptile is a mammal (Reptiles ∩ Mammals = ∅). By logical chaining: All snakes are reptiles, and no reptile is a mammal, therefore no snake is a mammal. This is a valid categorical syllogism (Barbara form with negation). Option B is the only logically sound conclusion.

Question 14

Statements:
1. All poets are creative individuals.
2. Some creative individuals are not writers.
3. All writers are published authors.

Which of the following conclusions is definitely true, or is it impossible to determine?
A) All poets are writers.
B) Some poets are not writers.
C) Either all poets are writers or some poets are not writers.
D) No poet is a writer.

Accepted Answer

From Statement 1: All poets are creative (Poets ⊂ Creative). From Statement 2: Some creative are not writers (Creative ⊄ Writers). However, this does NOT tell us whether poets specifically are or are not writers. The creative set includes both poets and non-poets. Statement 2 only guarantees that some creative individuals (not necessarily poets) are not writers. We cannot definitively conclude whether all poets are writers, some poets are writers, or no poets are writers based solely on these statements. However, Option C uses an 'Either/Or' structure: 'Either all poets are writers OR some poets are not writers.' This is a tautology—one of these two statements MUST be true in any logical system (law of excluded middle). Therefore, C is definitely true.

Question 15

Statements:
1. All engineers are problem-solvers.
2. No artist is a problem-solver.
3. Some professionals are artists.

Which of the following conclusions is definitely true?
A) Some professionals are not engineers.
B) All professionals are engineers.
C) No professional is an engineer.
D) Some engineers are professionals.

Accepted Answer

From Statement 1: All engineers are problem-solvers (Engineers ⊂ Problem-solvers). From Statement 2: No artist is a problem-solver (Artists ∩ Problem-solvers = ∅). From Statement 3: Some professionals are artists (Professionals ∩ Artists ≠ ∅). Logical chain: Some professionals are artists (S3), and no artist is a problem-solver (S2), therefore some professionals are not problem-solvers. Since all engineers are problem-solvers (S1), and some professionals are not problem-solvers, it follows that some professionals are not engineers. Option A is the only valid conclusion.

Question 16

Statements:
1. All doctors are highly educated.
2. Some highly educated individuals are not researchers.
3. All researchers are published authors.
4. No published author is a doctor.

Which of the following conclusions is definitely true?
A) Some doctors are researchers.
B) No doctor is a researcher.
C) Some doctors are published authors.
D) Either some doctors are researchers or no doctor is a researcher.

Accepted Answer

From Statement 1: All doctors are highly educated (Doctors ⊂ Highly educated). From Statement 4: No published author is a doctor (Published authors ∩ Doctors = ∅). From Statement 3: All researchers are published authors (Researchers ⊂ Published authors). Logical chain: All researchers are published authors, and no published author is a doctor, therefore no researcher is a doctor. Equivalently, no doctor is a researcher. Option B is the only valid conclusion. This is derived by chaining Statements 3 and 4, which directly establish the relationship between doctors and researchers.

SSC MTS Syllogism

SSC MTS Syllogism — Past Exam Questions

Syllogism— Rules & Concept

Key Points to Remember

Exam-Specific Tips

60-Second Revision — Syllogism