Introduction

There are two main types of Syllogism question

2-Statements

3-Statements
Question Statement
A. All cats are dogs
B. some pigs are cats
C. no dogs are birdsConclusion
I. some cats are dogs
II. no birds are cats
III. some pigs are birds
IV. some pigs are not birds

Question Statement:
I. All cats are dogs
II. All dogs are birdsConclusion:
I. Some cats are birds
II. Some birds are cats.

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

AEIO (analytical
Method)

Distribution of terms

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.

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.

Usually taught in CAT coaching classes and study

material.
(Tick method)

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. 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, Particular (positive
almost, generally, often, freqently, etc.
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

No conclusion can be drawn. Because it has four terms (cats,

Dogs
dogs, birds, pigs)
2. Some birds are A>B
pigs
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

Some Cats are dogs Particular Positive (PP)

Given Statement: All Cats are Dogs
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

Some dogs are not cats Particular Negative (PN)

Given Statement: No Cats are Dogs
No dogs are cats

It means UN can be converted into PN or UN.

Universal Negative (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

Particular negative (PN), hence

eliminate.

1 No Honest men are politicians.

Universal Negative, hence eliminate

1 Some Honest men are politicians.

PP hence this is correct answer.

1 None of Above.

not applicable because C is the correct

answer.

Politicians.

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
Subject (Politicians)

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

1. Sardar Patel
Subject (Politicians)

2. Lal Bahadur Shastri

3. Raja

4. Kalmadi

1. Sardar Patel
Predicate (Honest Men)

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

Valid Conversion

Universal Positive (UP)

Only PP

Universal Negative (UN)

PN or UN

Particular Positive (PP)

Only PP

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.

Have to convert, because not in standard format.1.All

1. All Cats are dogs (B)
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

Universal Positive (UP)

Particular Positive (PP)

No conclusion

Particular Negative (PN)

No conclusion

Universal Negative (UN)

No conclusion

Particular Negative (PN)

No conclusion

Particular Positive (PP)

No conclusion

Particular Negative (PN)

No conclusion

Any other (UP, UN, PP, PN)

No conclusion

Universal Negative (UN)

Particular Positive (PP)

Particular Negative (PN)

^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 B) Second statement (B to C) Conclusion
Universal Positive (UP)

Universal Positive (UP) (A to C)

Universal Negative (UN)

Universal Negative (UN) (A to C)

Universal positive (UP)

Particular Negative (PN). (C to

A)

Universal Positive (UP)

Universal Negative (UN)

Particular Positive (PP)
Universal Positive (UP)

Particular Positive (PP) (A to C)

Universal Negative (UN)

Particular Negative (PN) (A to C)

Particular Positive (PP)

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.

1 UP+UN=UN

If Uttar Pradesh meets United Nations then its size increases

and it becomes United Nations.

1 UN+

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)

(UP/PP)=PN

When Mr.PP observes the universe via NASA telescope, his

mood becomes positive or negative depending on the mood
(UP/UN)=PP/P
of universe.
N

1 PP+

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)

1 All women(B) are crazy.(C) (UP)

Third step, classify the statements.

1. All men are women.

Universal Positive (UP)

1 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

Correct.

1 All the crazy

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 2nd statement is false, hence answer is (C): only
1, 3 and 4 follow!

1 Some of the

Correct because of conversion table

crazy

are men

crazy are men

1 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
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)

ii. some
intelligent
persons are not
singers

False. UP+PP=no conclusion, as explained above.

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. 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

No apple is tasty.

Universal negative

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
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
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 either of them, into UN or PN.
C. Diamonds,
But in any case, both question statements will remain negative. And
Quartz, Opals.
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 enlarged and
B. Frank
becomes UN.
politicians and
So conclusion should be No crocodile is politician so this statement
crocodiles
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 TwoStatement 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

Typ
e
UP

No non-politician is honest.

2 No honest (people) are non-

UN

politicians.

1 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

Males

Sardar Patel

Lal Bahadur Shastri

Raja

Kalmadi

1 Sheila

honest

1. Sardar Patel

1. Sardar Patel

2. Lal Bahadur Shastri

2. Lal Bahadur Shastri

3. Raja

3. Bhagat Singh

4. Kalmadi

4. ChandraSekhar Azad

5. Bhagat Singh

5. Sarojini Naidu

6. ChandraSekhar Azad

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

1. Raja

1. Bhagat Singh

2. Kalmadi

2. Kalmadi

2. ChandraSekhar Azad

3. Sheila

3. Bhagat Singh

3. Sarojini Naidu

4. ChandraSekhar Azad

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 honest.2. No Honest

1. Some Politicians are honest.2. No
are Politicians.In first statement,
Politicians are honestBecause both
subject=Politician but in second statement,
have common subject (politician)
subject= Honest. Hence complemantary case
and common predicate (honest)
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

1. Some Politicians are honest.

2. No Politicians are honest

PP + United Nations (UN)

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 #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

1. Some birds are tree

2. Some women(B) 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
W well convert first statement. (UP to PP)

R After conversion
O

1. Some birds(A) are women (B)

2. Some women(B) are tree

G 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
C The priority order for Statement conversion is PP>UN>UP.

O 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.
R
So in the given case
R
1. All women(B) are birds

E
C
T

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)

1. Some birds are flowers

2. Some leaves(B) are birds (PP)

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 Not possible because combo rule.

flowers

1 Some leaves

first question statement says All flowers are leaves. If you

apply the conversion rule UP->PP, then

are flowers

All 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
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

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!

statement.)
4. Two-negatives=no conclusion.

5. Two particulars=no conclusion.

(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.