Syllogism by Mrunal.

com

Table Of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Basics
3. Subject vs Predicate
4. Classification of statement
5. Standard format: conversion
6. No conclusion Combos
7. Conclusive-Combos
8. DemoQ: Crazy men and Women
9. DemoQ: Intelligent Poets and singers
10. CAT-level
DemoQ: Sweet Testing Apples (CAT)
DemoQ: Working mother nurses (CAT)
DemoQ: 4 questions in 1!
Special Conversions
Complimentary pairs
Tricky Situations: Priority order
Tricky Situations: 1-Statement Conclusion
Summary







Introduction
There are two main types of Syllogism question
2-Statements 3-Statements
Question Statement:
I. All cats are dogs
II. All dogs are birds
Conclusion:
I. Some cats are birds
II. Some birds are cats.
Question Statement
A. All cats are dogs
B. some pigs are cats
C. no dogs are birds
Conclusion
I. some cats are dogs
II. no 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.)

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 non-CAT 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.(Uttar Pradesh United Nation) 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.
All, every, any, none, not a single, only etc. Universal (positive or negative)
Some, many, a few, quite a few, not many, very little, most of, almost,
generally, often, freqently, etc.
Particular (positive or negative)

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 statements Answer
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
2. B>C
1. First term>Middle Term
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
1. A>B
2. C>B
This must be converted into
1. A>B
2. B>C
Given question statements are
1. B>A
2. B>C
This must be converted into
1. A>B
2. B>C

Ok, so how to convert the statements?
Universal Positive (UP)
Given Statement Valid conversions Type
Given Statement: All Cats are Dogs
Some Cats are dogs Particular Positive (PP)
Some dogs are cats 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 Dogs
Some dogs are not cats Particular Negative (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 Thought process
1. Some Honest men are not Politicians.
Particular negative (PN), hence eliminate.
2. No Honest men are politicians.
Universal Negative, hence eliminate
3. Some Honest men are politicians.
PP hence this is correct answer.
4. None of Above.
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
Subject (Politicians)
1. Sardar Patel
2. Lal Bahadur Shastri
3. Raja
4. Kalmadi
Predicate (Honest Men)
1. Sardar Patel
2. Lal Bahadur Shastri
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
Predicate (Honest Men)
1. Sardar Patel
2. Lal Bahadur Shastri
3. Bhagat Singh
4. ChandraSekhar Azad

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 Valid Conversion Path
Universal Positive (UP)
All cats(A) are dogs (B)
Only PP
Some Cats (A) are dogs. (B)
Some dogs (B) are cats. (A)
A to B
B to A
Universal Negative (UN)
No Cats(A) are dogs (B)
PN :Some Dogs (B) are not Cats (A).
B to A
UN: No Dogs (B) are cats. (A)
Particular Positive (PP)
Some cats (A) are dogs (B)
Only PP: Some dogs (B) are cats(A) B to A
Particular Negative (PN) Not possible.
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 dogs(B)
2. Some dogs(B) are not pigs.
Already in standard format (A to B and then B to C)
hence no need to convert.
1. Some dogs(B) are not pigs.
2. All Cats are dogs(B)
No need to convert any statement.
Just exchange the position of first and second statement.
1. All Cats are dogs(B)
2. Some dogs(B) are not pigs.
1. All Cats are dogs (B)
2. All pigs are dogs(B)
Have to convert, because not in standard format.1.All cats(A) 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
Universal Positive (UP)
Particular Positive (PP) No conclusion
Particular Negative (PN) No conclusion
Universal Negative (UN)
Universal Negative (UN) No conclusion
Particular Negative (PN) No conclusion
Particular Positive (PP)
Particular Positive (PP) No conclusion
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 11
th
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 B) Second statement (B to C) Conclusion
Universal Positive (UP)
Universal Positive (UP) Universal Positive (UP) (A to C)
Universal Negative (UN) Universal Negative (UN) (A to C)
Universal Negative (UN)
Universal positive (UP)
Particular Negative (PN). (C to A)
Particular Positive (PP)
Particular Positive (PP)
Universal Positive (UP) Particular Positive (PP) (A to C)
Universal Negative (UN) Particular Negative (PN) (A 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 In your head, visualize
1. UP+UP=UP If Uttar Pradesh meets Uttar Pradesh, then its size doesnt increase.
2. UP+UN=UN If Uttar Pradesh meets United Nations then its size increases and it becomes United Nations.
3. UN+
(UP/PP)=PN
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)
4. PP+
(UP/UN)=PP/PN
When Mr.PP observes the universe via NASA telescope, his mood becomes positive or negative
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
1. None of the conclusion follows
2. All conclusions follow
3. Only 1, 3 and 4 follow
4. 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.
2. All the crazy are men
Recall that conversion table.Universal Positive (UP) can be converted only into Particular Positive (PP).
Since All men are crazy => Some Crazy are men.
But we cannot say All crazy are men. So this option is false.
If you apply common sense at this stage: well, 1
st
statement correct, and 2
nd
statement is false, hence answer
is (C): only 1, 3 and 4 follow!
3. Some of the crazy are men Correct because of conversion table
4. Some of the crazy are women
Given question statement : All women are crazy. (Universal positive). If we apply conversion table (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
1. only conclusion one follows
2. only conclusion two follows
3. either conclusion one or conclusion two follows
4. 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)
1. Apples are not sweet
2. Some apples are sweet
3. All sweets are tasty
4. Some apples are not tasty
5. No apple is tasty
answer choices
1. cea
2. bdc
3. cbd
4. 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
1. No mother is a nurse.
2. Some Nurses like to work
3. No woman is prude
4. Some prude are also nurses
5. Some nurses are women
6. All women like to work
1. ABE
2. CED
3. FEB
4. BEF

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





Statement Type
C (Statement I) No woman is prude Universal negative
E (Statement II) Some nurses are women Particular positive
D (conclusion) Some prude are also nurses Particular positive
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 Universal negative
Some nurses are women(B) 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

Statement Type
F (Statement I) All women like to work Universal positive UP
E (Statement II) Some nurses are women Particular positive PP
B (conclusion) Some nurses like to work Particular positive PP
three terms =yes. Standard form=no. but no need to convert, just exchange position of
statement I and II.
Some nurses(A) are women(B) Particular positive PP
All women(B) like to work (C) Universal positive UP
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
1. all dinosaurs are prehistoric creatures. Water buffaloes are not dinosaurs. Water buffaloes are
not prehistoric creatures
2. all politicians are frank. No frank people are crocodiles. No crocodiles are politicians
3. no diamond is quartz. No opal is quartz. Diamonds are opals.
4. All monkeys like bananas. Some Joes like bananas. Some Joes are monkeys.
Answer choice
1. Only C
2. Only B
3. Only A and D
4. Only B and C
Approach
C. Diamonds, Quartz, Opals.
Three terms yes. Standard format =No.Both question statements are
Universal negative. We can convert either of them, into UN or PN. But in any
case, both question statements will remain negative. And Two negatives=no
conclusion. So C is not possible. Hence answer choice (i) and (iv)
eliminated.
B. Frank politicians and crocodiles
Already in three terms standard format.UP+UN=size enlarged and becomes
UN.
So conclusion should be No crocodile is politician so 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
Conversion (all applicable to all given question
statements)
Type
None but Politicians are honest.
No one else but Politicians are
honest.
Only politicians are honest.
Politicians alone are honest
1. All honest(people) are politicians
UP
2. No non-politician is honest.
3. No honest (people) are non-politicians.
UN
4. Some politicians are honest




















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 11
th
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
1. Only 1 follows
2. Only 2 follows
3. Either 1 or 2 follows
4. 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 Males honest
5. Sardar Patel
6. Lal Bahadur Shastri
7. Raja
8. Kalmadi
9. Sheila
1. Sardar Patel
2. Lal Bahadur Shastri
3. Raja
4. Kalmadi
5. Bhagat Singh
6. ChandraSekhar Azad
1. Sardar Patel
2. Lal Bahadur Shastri
3. Bhagat Singh
4. ChandraSekhar Azad
5. Sarojini Naidu
6. Mother Teresa
In this case#1: some politicians (Sardar and Shastri) are honest.
So conclusion (1) may be possible.
Case#2
Politicians Males honest
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 complementary case.

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

Priority order In Conversion
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 #1 Route #2
Just convert the first statement.
1. Some Cats are dogs. (Rule:
UP to PP)
2. Some Dogs are pigs.
Well re-order the statements. (that is interchange thee position of both statements)
1. Some dogs(B) are pigs
2. All Dogs(B) are Cats
Now well convert the first statement.
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).
Tricky Situations: Priority order
Consider this scenario
Question statements Conclusion
1. All women(B) are birds
2. Some women(B) are tree
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.



WR
O
N
G
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

CO
R
R
E
C
T
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 positive statement first.
So in the given case
1. All women(B) are birds
2. Some women(B) are tree
Convert second statement. (PP to PP)
1. All women(B) are birds.
2. Some trees are women(B).
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 Conclusion
1. All the flowers are leaves.(B) (UP)
2. Some leaves(B) are birds (PP)
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 Thought process
1. Some birds are flowers Not possible because combo rule.
2. Some leaves are flowers
first question statement says All flowers are leaves. If you apply the conversion
rule UP->PP, thenAll flowers are leaves=> Some leaves are flowers. Hence this
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 Yes 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
11
th
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 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
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.
In later article, well see the 3-statement syllogism. It is basically extention of the same UP-
UN method that we learned here. However, to quickly solve 3-statements, first you must
become a master of 2-statement. So, practice as many sums as you can, from any of the
following books.