Ready to attempt these logical reasoning questions for CLAT 2023? Don’t forget to read the instructions first!
Directions: The questions in this section are based on the reasoning contained in brief statements or passages. For some questions, more than one of the choices could conceivably answer the question.
However, you are to choose the best answer, that is, the response that most accurately and completely answers the question. You should not make assumptions that are by common sense standards implausible, superfluous, or incompatible with the passage.
Logical Reasoning Questions for CLAT 2023
1. In a transportation company, a certain syndrome often attributed to stress by medical experts afflicts a significantly higher percentage of workers in Department ‘F’ than in any other department. We can conclude, therefore, that the work done in the Department ‘F’ subjects workers to higher stress levels than does the work in the other departments in the company.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to support the argument?
a. Department F has more employees than any other department in the company.
b. Some experts believe that the syndrome can be caused by various factors, only one of which is high stress.
c. Many workers who transfer into Department F from elsewhere in the company soon begin to develop the syndrome.
d. It is relatively common for workers in the transportation industry to suffer from the syndrome.
2. Because metallic mirrors absorb some light, they waste energy. When light strikes a metallic mirror, electrons in the mirror move, using energy and thereby dimming the reflected image. As a result, metallic mirrors cannot be used in applications in which minimising energy loss is important, such as high-powered lasers.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the argument’s main conclusion?
a. Metallic mirrors reduce the effectiveness of high-powered lasers.
b. Part of the light falling on metallic mirrors tends to be absorbed by them.
c. High-powered lasers require mirrors that conserve energy.
d. Metallic mirrors are unsuitable for applications where it is crucial to minimise energy loss.
3. If Poonam eats a heavy, spicy meal tonight, she will get a bad case of heartburn later. If Poonam gets a bad case of heartburn later, she will be grouchy tomorrow morning. So if Poonam eats a heavy, spicy meal tonight, she will be grouchy tomorrow morning.
Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its logical features to the argument above?
a. If Rani plants only nargis, the squirrels will eat the bulbs. If the squirrels eat the bulbs, then no flowers will bloom in Rani’s garden. Since no flowers are blooming in Rani’s garden, she must have planted only nargis.
b. If Sameer starts gardening in early spring, he can plant tomatoes early. If Sameer can plant tomatoes early, he will have plenty of tomatoes for canning. But he does not have plenty of tomatoes for canning, so either he did not start gardening in early spring or he did not plant tomatoes early.
c. Mala plants either petunias or geraniums in her garden. If Mala plants petunias, she plants purple ones. If Mala plants geraniums, she plants red ones. Since both petunias and geraniums are flowers, Mala will have either purple or red flowers in her garden.
d. If Manju plants old rose varieties, her garden will look beautiful. If Manju’s garden looks beautiful, Manju’s neighbours will be impressed. So if Manju plants old rose varieties, her neighbours will be impressed.
4. Sunil: Most people who commit violent crimes do not carefully consider whether or how they will be punished for these crimes. And those who don’t commit violent crimes have no inclination to do so. Rather than impose harsh mandatory sentences, we should attend to the root causes of violence to reduce the rate of violent crime.
Ruchi: Would you say the same about nonviolent crimes, such as tax evasion? Surely mandatory penalties are a useful deterrent in these cases. At any rate, I am confident that mandatory sentences prevent most people who would otherwise physically harm others from doing so.
The dialogue between Sunil and Ruchi most strongly supports the claim that they disagree about whether
a. the best way to reduce violent crime is to address the root causes of violence
b. people who commit violent crimes deserve harsh punishment
c. people who commit violent crimes carefully consider how they will be punished for their crimes
d. mandatory sentences will deter most people who might otherwise commit violent crimes
5. Those who participate in risky sports often do so to confront their fears. For example, rock climbers are more likely than others to have once suffered from a fear of heights. Those who participate in such risk-taking activities also have more self-confidence than others, so it is probably true that confronting one’s fears increases one’s self-confidence.
Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the reasoning above?
a. Often those who suffer from fears such as a fear of heights either do not know that they suffer from those fears or do not know the extent to which they suffer from them.
b. In general, people who currently participate in risky sports had above-average self-confidence even before participating in any risky sport.
c. Most people who refrain from engaging in risky sports refrain from doing so for reasons other than a fear of death or injury.
d. Participating in risky sports is not the only way to confront one’s fears.
1. (c) Explanation: The argument has one premise: a syndrome often attributed to stress is more common in Department F than in other departments in a transportation company. The argument concludes that the work done in Department F is more stressful than the work done in other departments. The question asks you to identify a statement that helps to support this argument.
The Correct Answer: C By revealing an association between transferring into Department F and developing the syndrome, (C) provides evidence that it is something about Department F, such as the nature of the work there, that causes people to develop the syndrome. So (C) helps to support the argument that the work in Department F is more stressful than the work in other departments.
2. (d) Explanation: The question asks you to identify the main conclusion of the argument in the passage. The passage begins with the claim that metallic mirrors absorb some light, which causes them to waste energy. The next statement elaborates on the first claim by explaining why light hitting a metallic mirror wastes energy. Finally, the passage says that metallic mirrors cannot be used where it’s important to minimise energy loss. This statement is supported most directly by the first claim, which points out that metallic mirrors waste energy.
The Correct Answer: D, (D ) expresses the last claim made in the passage. As discussed in the ‘Overview’, that claim is supported directly by the first claim made in the passage, but isn’t used to support any other part of the argument. It is therefore the main conclusion.
3. (d) Explanation: The question presents an argument and asks you to identify which other argument is most similar in its logical features. The argument in the passage chains together two if/then statements to infer a third if/then statement.
More specifically, the structure of the argument in the passage is the following: If a certain event (Poonam eats a heavy, spicy meal) occurs, then a second event (Poonam will get heartburn) will inevitably follow. If that second event occurs, then a third event (Poonam will be grouchy) will inevitably follow the second. From this, the argument concludes that if the first event occurs, then the third will also occur.
The Correct Answer: D, (D) has the same logical structure as the argument in the passage, which is analysed in the ‘Overview. The first event is Manju planting old rose varieties. The second event, which will follow from this, is that Manju’s garden will look beautiful. The third event, which will follow from the second event, is that Manju’s neighbours will be impressed.
Finally, (D) concludes that if the first event occurs, then the third event will also occur.
4. (d) Explanation: This question presents a dialogue about criminal punishment and asks what the two speakers disagree about.
Sunil’s view is that those who don’t commit violent crimes would not commit violent crimes regardless of the punishment, while most people who do commit violent crimes don’t consider punishment, so they can’t be deterred. Therefore, harsh punishments do not deter violent crimes.
Ruchi thinks that in most cases in which a person would commit a violent crime, they are deterred from doing so by the presence of a mandatory punishment.
The Correct Answer: D, Ruchi says that mandatory sentences prevent most people who would otherwise physically harm others (i.e. commit violent crimes) from doing so. So Ruchi would clearly accept (D).
As discussed in the ‘Overview’, Sunil says that most people who do commit violent crimes don’t consider the threat of punishment and that those who don’t commit violent crimes have no inclination to commit violent crimes. It follows that most people who are inclined to commit violent crimes are not deterred by mandatory sentences. So Sunil would not accept (D).
5. (b) Explanation: The argument states that people who participate in risky sports often do so to confront their fears. It also states that people who participate in risky sports have more self-confidence. The argument concludes that confronting fears probably increases self-confidence. The question asks what most weakens this reasoning. Note that the argument concludes that confronting fears produces a change in self-confidence.
Therefore, in order to reach the conclusion, it must be true that the self-confidence of those who participate in risky sports changed after they began participating in them.
The Correct Answer: B, As discussed in the ‘Overview’, in order for the conclusion to be true, it must be true that the self-confidence of people who participate in risky sports has changed. But the only evidence offered for this change is that they have above-average self-confidence after participating in risky sports.
So (B), which says that most of them already had above-average self-confidence even before participating in the sports, seriously undermines the impact of this evidence.