CCAT Logical Reasoning Flashcards

All streets are routes of transportation. No streets are racing tracks. Conclusion is: Some racing tracks are not routes of transportation.

Answer: Incorrect

From 'All streets are routes of transportation' and 'No streets are racing tracks,' we know that streets are a subset of routes, and racing tracks are distinct from streets. This does not logically necessitate that *some* racing tracks are not routes of transportation. It's entirely possible that *all* racing tracks are also routes of transportation, even if they are not 'streets.' The conclusion is not a necessary consequence of the given premises.

Every man is a brother. Every brother is a father. It follows that some fathers are men.

Answer: Correct

This is a valid syllogism. If 'Every man is a brother' and 'Every brother is a father,' then it logically follows that 'Every man is a father.' If every man is a father, then it must necessarily be true that *some* fathers are men. The conclusion is a weaker but valid inference derived from the stronger implied conclusion.

No actors in movies are comedians. Every producer is a movie star. It follows that not all comedians are also producers.

Answer: Correct

The conclusion 'not all comedians are also producers' (meaning some comedians are not producers) logically follows if we assume 'actors in movies' and 'movie stars' refer to the same group. If 'No actors in movies are comedians' means 'No movie stars are comedians,' and 'Every producer is a movie star,' then it implies 'No producers are comedians.' If no producers are comedians, then it is necessarily true that not all comedians are producers. The other option is incorrect because, under this interpretation, the conclusion is a valid deduction.

Drug users are not addicted. There are no alcoholic drug users. The implication is that all alcoholics are addicts.

Answer: Incorrect

The premises state that drug users are not addicted, and there are no alcoholic drug users. This means alcoholics are a group distinct from drug users. However, the premises provide no information about whether alcoholics are addicted or not. Therefore, the conclusion that 'all alcoholics are addicts' does not logically follow from the given statements, making the implication incorrect.

An automobile is not a boat, Some boats function as water bicycles.

Answer: Some water bicycles are no cars

The first premise states that automobiles are not boats, meaning these two categories are mutually exclusive. The second premise establishes that some boats are water bicycles. Therefore, any water bicycle that is also a boat cannot be an automobile. This logically leads to the conclusion that there exist some water bicycles that are not cars.

All smart asses are dumb asses. Some smart asses are bad asses.

Answer: Some dumb asses are bad asses

The first premise establishes that all smart asses are a subset of dumb asses. The second premise indicates that there is an overlap between smart asses and bad asses. Since every smart ass is also a dumb ass, any individual who is both a smart ass and a bad ass must necessarily also be a dumb ass and a bad ass. Therefore, it logically follows that some dumb asses are also bad asses.

Every kitchen has a closet. Shelves are found in every closet.

Answer: All kitchens have shelves

The first premise states that every kitchen contains a closet. The second premise then specifies that shelves are found in every closet. By combining these two statements, a direct chain of inclusion is formed: if a kitchen has a closet, and that closet invariably has shelves, then every kitchen must, by extension, have shelves.