- Mrunal - http://mrunal.

org -

[Reasoning] Logical Connectives (if, unless, either or) for CSAT, CAT
shortcuts formulas approach explained
Posted BySupport StaffOn 30/04/2013 @ 1:47 pm In Aptitude | 193 Comments

Difference: Syllogism vs Logical connectives

Standard format: logical connectives
Logical connective: if then
Logical connective: Only IF
Logical Connective: UNLESS
Logical connective: otherwise
Logical connective: When, Whenever, every time
Logical Connective: Either OR
Demo Q: Only if: bored TV brother (CSAT 2012)
Demo Q (If, then) Professor Headaches  (CAT’98)
Demo Q: Either or: derailed/late train (CAT’97)

Difference: Syllogism vs Logical connectives

Syllogism (all cats are dog) is a common and routinely appearing topic in most of the aptitude exams
(Bank PO, LIC, SSC etc). But Logical connectives is rare. However, in UPSC CSAT 2012 the topic was
asked, therefore, you’ve to prepare it.

Syllogism Logical connectives

Contains words like “all, none, some” etc. Can be Contains words like “if, unless, only if, whenever”
classified into UP, UN,PP and PN. Already explained in etc. can be classified into 1, ~1, 2, ~2 (we’ll see in
previous articles. this article)
Have to mugup more formulas, takes more time than
Less formulas and quicker than syllogism.
logical connective questions.
Question statements:
Question Statements:
I watch TV only if I am bored
All cats are dogs I am never bored when I have my brother’s
some pigs are cats company.
no dogs are bird Whenever I go to the theatre I take my brother
Conclusion choices: along.
Conclusion choices:
Some cats are dogs
No birds are cats If I am bored I watch TV
some pigs are birds If I am bored, I seek my brother’s company.
Some pigs are not birds If I am not with my brother, than i’ll watch TV.
If I am not bored I do not watch TV.

Standard format: logical connectives

If, unless, only if, whenever, every time etc. are examples of Logical connectives.
Whenever you’re given a question statement, first rule is: question statement must be in the standard
format.
The standard format is
****some logical connective word *** simple statement#1, simple statement #2.
It means, the question statement must start with a logical connective word, otherwise exchange position.
For example
Given question statement Exchange position?
If you’re in the army, you’ve to no need because the simple statement containing “IF” is given in the
wear uniform beginning. This is already in the standard format.
We need to exchange position because the part containing “IF” is not
given in the beginning of this statement, given statement is not in
You’ve to wear uniform, if you’re
standard format.
in the army
Therefore, Rewrite given statement as
If you’re in the army, you’ve to wear uniform.
Need to exchange position. Because statement doesn’t start with the
You’ve to salute, whenever
logical connective “whenever”.
Commanding Officer comes in
Therefore rewrite the given statement as
your cabin.
Whenever CO comes in your cabin, you have to salute.
Now let’s derive valid inferences for various logical connectives.

Logical connective: if then

Consider these two simple statements

You’re in army
You’ve to wear uniform.
These are two simple statements. Now I’ll combine these two simple statements (#1 and #2) to form a
complex statement.

If you’re in army(#1), you have to wear uniform.(#2)

What about its reverse?

You’ve wearing uniform (#2)—> that means you’re in the army.(#1)

But there is possibility, you’re in navy—-> you’ll still have to wear a uniform. It means,
if 1=>2, then 2=>1 is not always a valid inference.
Let’s list all such scenarios in a table.
Given statement:If you’re in army(#1), you have to wear uniform.(#2)
Inference? Valid / invalid?
If you’ve to wear uniform, you’re in you’ve to wear uniform in navy, air force, BSF etc. so this
If #2, then #1
army. inference is not always valid.
If not #1, if you’re not in army, you don’t you’ve to wear uniform in navy, air force, BSF etc. so this
then not #2 have to wear uniform. inference is not always valid.
if not #2, then If you don’t have to wear uniform,
Always valid.
not #1 you’re not in army.
In the exam, you don’t have to think ^that much. Just mugup the following rule:
Given statement =“If #1 then #2”, in such situation the only valid inference is “if Not #2, then not #1”.
In other words, “if 1st happens then 2nd happens”, in such situation, the only valid inference is “if 2nd did
not happen then 1st did not happen”.
Now I want to construct a short and sweet reference table for the logical connective problems. So I’ll use
the symbol ~= negative.
~1=meaning NOT 1 ( or in other words, negative of #1)

Given Valid inference

If 1, then 2 If not 2, then not 1
If 1=>2 ~2=>~1
In some books, material, sites, you’ll find these rules explained as using “P” and “Q” instead of 1 and 2.
But in our method, you first make sure the given (complex) statement starts with a logical connective (or
you exchange position as explained earlier)
We denote the first simple sentence as #1 and second simple sentence as #2.
The reason for using 1 and 2= makes things less complicated and easier to mugup.

Logical connective: Only IF

In such scenario, you’ve to rephrase given statement into “if then” and then apply the logical connective
rule for “if then”.
For example: given statement: he scores a century, only if the match is fixed.
The “standard format”= only if the match is fixed(1), he scores a century(2).
In case of “only if”, we further convert it into an “if” statement, by exchanging positions. That is
if he scores a century(#2), the match is fixed(#1).
Then apply the formula for “if then” and get valid inference.
Here we’ve “if 2=>1” as per our formula for “if then”, the valid inference will be ~1=>~2. Don’t confuse
between 1 and 2. Because essentially the valid inference is “negative of end part => negative of starting
part”.
Therefore “if 2=>1 then ~1=~2”
similarly “if 98=>97, then valid inference will be ~97=>~98”
Similarly “if p=>q, then valid inference will be ~q=>~p”,
similarly “if b=>a, then valid inference will be ~a=~b”) .
Update our table
Logical Given Valid inference using
Valid inf. In words
connective statement symbol
Negative of end part=> negative of start
If If 1=>2 ~2=>~1
part
Negative of start part=>negative of end
Only if Only if 1=>2 ~1=>~2
part.

Logical Connective: UNLESS

Given statement: Unless you bribe the minister(#1), you will not get the 2G license.(#2)
Unless = if…..not.
So, I can re-write the given statement as
(new) Given statement: If you don’t bribe the minister(#1), you’ll not get the 2G license.(#2)
How to come up with a valid inference here?

#1 You don’t bribe the minister

#2 You’ll not get the 2G license.
For “if..then”, We’ve mugged up the rule:  1=>2 then only valid inference is ~2=>~1. (in other words,
negative of end part => negative of starting part).
let’s construct the valid inference for this 2G minister.
we want ~2 => ~1
Negative of (2) => negative of (1)
Negative of (you’ll not get the 2G license)=>negative of (you don’t bribe the minister)
You’ll get the 2G license => you bribe the minister.
In other words, If I see a 2G license in your hand, then I can infer that you had definitely bribed the minister.
This is one way of doing “unless” questions = via converting it into “if…not” type of statement.
The short cut is to mugup another formula: unless1=>2 then ~2=>1.
How did we come up with above formula?
Deriving the formula for unless
Unless 1=>2 (given statement)
if not 1=>2  (because unless=if not)
if ~1=>2 (I’m using symbol ~ instead of “not”)
~2=> ~(~1) (because we already mugged up the rule “if 1=>2, then valid inference is ~2=>~1)
~2=>1 (because ~(~1) means double negative and double negative is positive hence ~(~1)=1)
This is our second rule: Unless1=>2 then ~2=>1

Table
Logical Given Valid inference using
Valid inf. In words
connective statement symbol
Negative of end part=> negative of start
If If 1=>2 ~2=>~1
part
Only if Only if 1=>2 ~1=>~2 Negative of start part=>negative of end
part.
Negative of end part=>start part
Unless Unless 1=>2 ~2=>1 unchanged.

Logical connective: otherwise

Suppose given statement is: 1, otherwise 2.
you can write it as unless 1 then 2.  (unless1=>2)
Then use the formula for “unless.”

Logical connective: When, Whenever, every time

Given statement: he scores century, when match is fixed.
This is not in standard format of “**logical connective word**, simple statement #1, simple statement
#2.”
So first I need to exchange the positions: “when match is fixed (#1), he scores century (#2)”.
In case of when and whenever, the valid inference is= same like “If, then”. That means negative of end
part=>negative of starting part.
Same formula works for “whenever” and “Everytime”.
Update the table
Logical Given Valid inference using
Valid inf. In words
connective statement symbol
If If 1=>2
When When 1=>2
Whenever Negative of end part=> negative of starting
Whenever ~2=~1
1=>2 part
Everytime
Everytime
1=>2
Only if Only if 1=>2 ~1=>~2 Negative of start part=>negative of end part.
Negative of end part=>starting part
Unless Unless 1=>2 ~2=>1
unchanged.

Logical Connective: Either OR

Given statement: Either he is drunk(1) or he is ill(2).

In such cases, if not 1 then 2. And if not 2 then 1.

Meaning,

if he is not drunk then he is definitely ill

if he is not ill, then he is definitely drunk
both are valid. Update the table
Logical Given statement Valid inference Valid inf. In words
connective using symbol
If If 1=>2
When When 1=>2 Negative of end part=> negative of starting
~2=~1
Whenever Whenever 1=>2 part
Everytime Everytime 1=>2
Only if Only if 1=>2 ~1=>~2 Negative of start part=>negative of end part.
Unless Unless 1=>2
Negative of end part=>starting part
1 otherwise 2=> rewrite as ~2=>1
Otherwise unchanged.
Unless1=>2.
~2=>1 Negative of any one part=> remaining part
Either or Either 1 or 2
~1=>2 remains unchanged.
Now let’s solve some questions from old CSAT and CAT papers
Please note: in the exam, actual wording / meaning of the simple statement doesn’t matter. Just apply the
formulas as given in above table.
For example, “if you’re in army, you have to wear uniform.” Then valid inference is ~2=>~1 (you don’t have
to wear uniform, then you’re not in army).
Now ofcourse there would be exceptional situation when army officer/jawan doesn’t need to wear uniform,
for example during espionage mission behind the enemy lines. In that case you don’t have to wear
uniform, but you’re still in the army.
But keep in mind, while solving logical connective question under the “aptitude/reasoning” portion you
don’t have to surgically dissect or nitpick the meaning every statement. Just “if 1=>2” then “~2=>~1”.

Demo Q: Only if: bored TV brother (CSAT 2012)

Examine the following statements:

I watch TV only if I am bored

I am never bored when I have my brother’s company.
Whenever I go to the theatre I take my brother along.
Which one of the following conclusions is valid in the context of the above statements?

If I am bored I watch TV
If I am bored, I seek my brother’s company.
If I am not with my brother, then I’ll watch TV.
If I am not bored I do not watch TV.
Approach
First we’ll construct valid inferences from the question statements

Given Question Statement #1:

Given =I watch TV only if I am bored
This is not in standard format. So first exchange position
Only if I’m bored (1), I watch TV(2)
What is the valid inference? Just look at the formula table
Only if 1=>2 then ~1=~2
Valid inference= if I’m not bored, I do not watch TV.
Look at the statements given in the answer choices, (D) matches. Therefore, final answer is (D).

Demo Q (If, then) Professor Headaches  (CAT’98)

You’re given a statement, followed by four statements labeled A to D. Choose the ordered pair of
statements where the first statement implies the second and two statements are logically consistent with
the main statement.

Given statement: If I talk to my professors(1), then I didn’t need to take a pill for headache.(2)

Four Statements

I talked to my professors
I did not need to take a pill for headache
I needed to take a pill for headache
I did not talk to my professor.
Answer choices

AB
DC
CD
AB and CD
Approach
Given statement is in standard format already

#1 I talk to my professors
#2 I didn’t need to take a pill for headache.
Let’s classify the four statements

Classification Four statements

1 I talked to my professors
2 I did not need to take a pill for headache
~2 I needed to take a pill for headache
~1 I did not talk to my professor.
Answer choice (i) AB
If you observe the answer choice (I): AB= I talked to my professors, I did not need to take a pill for
headache. This is valid because if 1=>2 is already given in the question statement itself.

Answer choice (ii) DC

I did not talk to my professor (~1), I needed to take a pill for headache (~2). Meaning ~1=>~2.
This is invalid because as per our table, if 1=>2, then valid inference is ~2=>~1.
Answer choice (iii) CD
I needed to take pill for headache (~2), I did not talk to my professor (~1). Meaning ~2=>~1. This is valid
as per our table. Therefore final answer is (IV) AB and CD

Demo Q: Either or: derailed/late train (CAT’97)

Given statement: either the train is late (1) or it has derailed (2)

Four statements

Train is late = 1
Train is not late = ~1
Train is derailed =2
Train is not derailed =~2
(^note: I’ve classified the statements in advance)

Answer choice

AB
DB
CA
BC
Approach
As per our table, the valid inferences for either or are

~2=>1 If the train is not derailed, it is late. DA

~1=>2 If the train is not late, it is derailed BC
Correct answer is (III): BC
For more articles on reasoning and aptitude, visit Mrunal.org/aptitude

Article printed from Mrunal: http://mrunal.org

URL to article: http://mrunal.org/2013/04/reasoning-logical-connectives-if-unless-either-or-for-csat-cat-

shortcuts-formulas-approach-explained.html

Copyright © 2014 Mrunal. All rights reserved.