A logistics company's app message says: "Download our app to track your parcel in real time." Which assumption is implicit in the statement?

The app can provide real-time tracking information.

Why are conclusions using absolute qualifiers such as 'always' or 'never' frequently classified as invalid?

They typically lack the necessary support from the limited premise

Argument: 'Increasing the minimum wage will reduce poverty.' Which statement most WEAKENS this argument?

Higher minimum wages may cause businesses to hire fewer workers

Argument: 'Banning fast food restaurants near schools will reduce childhood obesity.' What assumption underlies this argument?

Children eat fast food primarily from restaurants near school

Statement and Conclusion: Deciding Validity

2026-06-14

Core Concepts

Understanding the relationship between a statement and a conclusion is essential for the Logical Reasoning section of the CMAT. Success depends on your ability to extract information precisely without adding your own bias or outside knowledge.

Statement: The provided premise or information that is considered true for the context of the question. Treat this as the absolute truth.
Conclusion: A deductive claim that logically follows from the statement. Your task is to determine if this claim is definitively supported by the information given.

The Golden Rule

Never introduce outside information. Even if a statement sounds illogical or false in the real world (e.g., "All birds are made of metal"), you must accept it as fact within the question's logic. If the conclusion is not directly supported by the statement provided, it is invalid.

Strategy for Testing Validity

Direct Inference: If the conclusion is a restatement or a direct derivative of the information in the statement, it is generally valid.
Logical Necessity: Ask yourself: "If the statement is true, is it impossible for the conclusion to be false?" If there is even one possible scenario where the conclusion could be false, it is not a valid conclusion.
Venn Diagrams: Use them to visualize relationships between categories (e.g., "All A are B") to see if the conclusion fits within the overlapping regions.

Worked Example

Statement: "All engineers are logical. Some logical people are not creative."

Conclusion 1: "Some engineers are not creative." (Invalid: The statement does not define the relationship between engineers and creativity. We cannot assume this.)
Conclusion 2: "Some logical people are engineers." (Valid: This follows from the statement "All engineers are logical.")

Common Traps

Over-generalization: Assuming that because some of a group has a trait, all of them do.
External Assumptions: Bringing in real-world facts that are not present in the provided statement.
Assuming the Converse: Treating "All A are B" as "All B are A." This is a logical fallacy.

Quick Revision

Stick strictly to the text provided in the statement.
If the conclusion uses words like "always," "never," or "only," be extra cautious, as these often create invalid constraints.
Use the negation test: If the negation of the conclusion contradicts the statement, the conclusion is likely valid.

Practise these as timed MCQs to lock the pattern in.