Overview: Critical Reasoning | Logical Reasoning for CLAT PDF Download

How to Solve: Look at the premises and conclusion. Find gaps, weak evidence, or wrong assumptions.

1. Some students perform better with in-person coaching.
2. Online coaching is affordable.
3. Students like flexible schedules.
4. Teachers prefer online classes.

Answer: (a) weakens by showing online coaching isn’t always better.

How to Solve: Choose only what the text supports. Don’t add extra ideas.

Example 1: “All law students must attend classes. Some students miss classes and fail.”

Question: What can you infer?

1. Some students don’t follow the class rule.
2. Classes guarantee passing.
3. All who fail miss classes.
4. Classes are optional.

Answer: (a) is correct, as missing classes means not following the rule.

Example 2: “All law firms require interns to draft reports. Some interns who don’t draft well are not hired.”

Question: What can be inferred?

1. Some interns don’t meet the drafting requirement.
2. Drafting well ensures hiring.
3. All interns who aren’t hired draft poorly.
4. Law firms provide drafting training.

Answer: (a) follows, as poor drafting means not meeting the requirement.

How to Solve: Ask, “What must be true for the conclusion to make sense?” Negate the assumption—if the argument breaks, it’s correct.

Example 1: “Banning junk food in schools will make students healthier.”

Question: What is assumed?

1. Junk food makes students unhealthy.
2. Students eat only at school.
3. Healthier food is available.
4. Students like healthy food.

Answer: (a) is assumed, as the argument depends on junk food causing health issues.

Example 2: “Increasing library hours will improve student grades.”

Question: What is assumed?

1. More library time helps students study better.
2. Students want longer library hours.
3. Grades are low now.
4. Libraries have enough books.

Answer: (a) is the assumption, as better study time is needed for better grades.

How to Solve: For weaken, find something that breaks the assumption or conclusion. For strengthen, find something that supports it.

Example 1: “Banning plastic bottles will reduce waste in schools.”

Question: What strengthens this?

1. Plastic bottles are a major source of school waste.
2. Students will use reusable bottles.
3. The ban is easy to enforce.
4. Plastic bottles are cheap.

Answer: (a) strengthens by showing plastic bottles cause waste.

Example 2: “Online exams will improve fairness because they reduce cheating.”

Question: What weakens this?

1. Cheating is still possible in online exams.
2. Online exams are costly.
3. Students prefer offline exams.
4. Teachers monitor online exams.

Answer: (a) weakens by showing online exams don’t stop cheating.

How to Solve: For assumptions, find what connects premises to the conclusion. For conclusions, find what follows logically.

Example 1: If you attend CLAT coaching, you’ll score high. Neha attended coaching.

Question: What is the conclusion?

1. Neha will score high.
2. Neha will fail.
3. Coaching is mandatory.
4. Neha skipped coaching.

Answer: (a) follows from the premises.

Example 2: If a case has strong evidence, the lawyer wins. The lawyer won.

Question: What is assumed?

1. The case had strong evidence.
2. The lawyer is skilled.
3. The case was simple.
4. The judge was fair.

Answer: (a) is assumed, as the win depends on strong evidence.

How to Solve: Look for common errors like wrong assumptions or ignoring other possibilities.

Example 1: “Eating vegetables is healthy because they grow in soil.”

Question: What’s the flaw?

1. It assumes all things from soil are healthy.
2. It ignores vegetable prices.
3. It doesn’t define “healthy.”
4. It assumes all vegetables are the same.

Answer: (a) is the flaw, as not all soil-grown things are healthy.

Example 2: “This lawyer wins all cases because she won her last case.”

Question: What’s the flaw?

1. It assumes one win means all wins.
2. It ignores the lawyer’s skills.
3. It doesn’t mention case details.
4. It assumes cases are similar.

Answer: (a) is the flaw, as one win doesn’t prove all wins.

How to Solve: Find an explanation that makes both parts work together.

Example 1: “More students use the library, but book borrowing is down.”

Question: What explains this?

1. Students use e-books online.
2. The library has fewer books.
3. Students study in groups.
4. Library hours are shorter.

Answer: (a) explains lower borrowing with e-book use.

Example 2: “More people join law coaching, but CLAT pass rates are lower.”

Question: What explains this?

1. The CLAT exam has become tougher.
2. Coaching is affordable.
3. More students apply for CLAT.
4. Coaching quality varies.

Answer: (a) explains lower pass rates with a tougher exam.

How to Solve: Check if the premises fully support the conclusion. Look for gaps.

Example 1: “All good judges are fair. Priya is a good judge. So, Priya is fair.”

Question: Is the conclusion valid?

1. Valid, as it follows the premises.
2. Invalid, as it assumes all judges are good.
3. Valid, as fairness is guaranteed.
4. Invalid, as some judges may not be fair.

Answer: (a) is correct, as the conclusion follows logically.

Example 2: “All successful law firms hire top graduates. Firm X is successful. So, Firm X hires top graduates.”

Question: Is the conclusion valid?

1. Valid, as it follows the premises.
2. Invalid, as it assumes all graduates are top.
3. Valid, as success ensures hiring.
4. Invalid, as some firms hire differently.

Answer: (a) is correct, as the conclusion is supported.

How to Solve: Break the argument into parts and see how they connect.

Example 1: “If it rains, courts close. It’s raining. Courts close.”

Question: What’s the structure?

1. Cause-and-effect relationship.
2. General rule to specific case.
3. Assumption without proof.
4. Unrelated premises.

Answer: (a) describes the cause (rain) and effect (courts close).

Example 2: “If a law is passed, pollution decreases. The law was passed. Pollution decreases.”

Question: What’s the structure?

1. Cause-and-effect relationship.
2. General rule to specific case.
3. Assumption without evidence.
4. Unrelated premises.

Answer: (a) describes the cause (law passed) and effect (pollution decreases).