Applying Deductive Reasoning Flashcards
7 cards from real Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Applying Deductive Reasoning flashcards as text
Premise: All contracts require two parties. Premise: A memorandum of understanding (MOU) is not signed by two parties in this case. Conclusion: This MOU is not a contract. Does the conclusion follow?
Answer: Yes, the conclusion follows
If all contracts require two parties and this MOU lacks two-party signatures, it deductively cannot be a contract.
Premise: No employee who is on probation may approve expenditures. Premise: Maria is on probation. Conclusion: Maria cannot approve expenditures. Does the conclusion follow?
Answer: Yes, the conclusion follows necessarily
The universal negative premise combined with Maria's membership in that group makes the conclusion deductively certain.
Premise: Every merger requires board approval. Premise: The acquisition of Company X received board approval. Conclusion: The acquisition of Company X is a merger. Does the conclusion follow?
Answer: No, the conclusion does not follow
Board approval is necessary for mergers but may also apply to other actions; you cannot reverse the conditional.
Premise: If a study has a control group, its findings are more reliable. Premise: Study Z does not have a control group. Conclusion: Study Z's findings are not reliable. Does the conclusion follow?
Answer: No, the conclusion does not follow
The premise says a control group increases reliability, not that without one the study is necessarily unreliable.
Premise: All managers in Department A received a performance bonus. Premise: Leon received a performance bonus. Conclusion: Leon is a manager in Department A. Does the conclusion follow?
Answer: No, the conclusion does not follow
The bonus could have been received for reasons other than being a Department A manager; the premises do not rule that out.
Premise: Whenever production costs exceed revenue, the company operates at a loss. Premise: This quarter, production costs exceeded revenue. Conclusion: The company is operating at a loss this quarter. Does the conclusion follow?
Answer: Yes, the conclusion follows
The conditional is directly satisfied by the second premise, making the conclusion deductively valid.
Premise: No software that has unpatched vulnerabilities may be deployed to production. Premise: Application Beta has unpatched vulnerabilities. Conclusion: Application Beta may be deployed to production after review. Does the conclusion follow?
Answer: No, the conclusion contradicts the premises
The first premise is an absolute prohibition; adding a 'review' step contradicts the stated universal rule.