Skip to main content
Verbal 3% exam weight

Logical Reasoning in Verbal

Part of the NMAT (Philippines) study roadmap. Verbal topic verbal-009 of Verbal.

Logical Reasoning in Verbal

🟢 Lite — Quick Review (1h–1d)

Rapid summary for last-minute revision before your NMAT exam.

Logical Reasoning — Key Facts

Argument Structure

  • Premise(s): Evidence, facts, or assumptions
  • Conclusion: The claim being argued
  • Reasoning: The connection between premise and conclusion

Common Fallacies

FallacyDescription
Ad HominemAttacking the person instead of the argument
Straw ManMisrepresenting opponent’s argument
False CauseAssuming one event caused another
Hasty GeneralizationDrawing conclusion from too few examples
Appeal to AuthorityUsing authority as sole proof
Bandwagon”Everyone does it” fallacy

NMAT High-Yield: Distinguish fact from opinion, and identify assumptions that need to be true for the argument to hold.


🟡 Standard — Regular Study (2d–2mo)

Chapter: Logical Reasoning in Verbal

1.1 Understanding Arguments

Premise vs Conclusion

Premise: A statement offered as evidence or reason Conclusion: The statement that the argument is trying to prove

Identifying Conclusion:

  • Look for conclusion signal words: therefore, thus, hence, so, consequently, as a result, it follows that, this shows that
  • Ask: “What is the author trying to convince me of?”

Identifying Premises:

  • Look for premise signal words: because, since, for, as, given that, owing to, due to
  • Ask: “What evidence is offered?”

Example

Since the NMAT is a difficult exam (premise), therefore students should begin preparing early (conclusion).“

1.2 Types of Arguments

Deductive Argument

  • General principle → Specific application
  • If premises are true, conclusion MUST be true
  • “All mammals are warm-blooded. Whales are mammals. Therefore, whales are warm-blooded.”

Inductive Argument

  • Specific observations → General conclusion
  • Conclusion is probable, not certain
  • “The sun rose yesterday. The sun rose today. Therefore, the sun will rise tomorrow.”

1.3 Evaluating Arguments

Strength of Reasoning

Ask:

  1. Are the premises TRUE?
  2. Is the reasoning LOGICAL?
  3. Is the conclusion SUPPORTED?

Assumptions

An assumption is something that must be true for the argument to work.

Example: Argument: “You should take the NMAT because it will help you get into medical school.” Assumption: The NMAT score actually affects medical school admission.

Unstated Assumptions

If the assumption is NOT stated in the passage, it’s an UNSTATED ASSUMPTION.

1.4 Common Fallacies

Ad Hominem (Attack the Person)

  • ✗ “We shouldn’t believe his opinion about climate change because he’s not a scientist.” (He may still be right)
  • Better: “His opinion about climate change is wrong because…”

Straw Man

  • Misrepresenting someone’s argument to make it easier to attack
  • A says: “We should reduce carbon emissions.”
  • B says: “A wants to shut down all factories!” (straw man)

False Cause (Post Hoc)

  • Assuming A caused B just because A happened before B
  • “The rooster crows before sunrise, so the rooster causes the sun to rise.”

Hasty Generalization

  • Drawing a broad conclusion from too few examples
  • “I met two rude doctors, therefore all doctors are rude.”

Appeal to Authority

  • Using authority as the only proof when authority isn’t expert in that field
  • “A famous actor says this medicine is best, so it must be.”

Bandwagon

  • “Everyone is doing it, so it must be right.”
  • Popular doesn’t mean correct.

Circular Reasoning

  • The conclusion is assumed in the premise
  • “The Bible is true because it says so in the Bible.”

False Dilemma/Black-and-White

  • Presenting only two options when more exist
  • “You’re either with us or against us.”

Slippery Slope

  • Assuming one event will inevitably lead to extreme consequences
  • “If we allow phones in school, students will never pay attention.”

1.5 Strengthening and Weakening Arguments

Strengthening

  • Adding evidence that supports the conclusion
  • Providing missing assumptions
  • Eliminating counterarguments

Weakening

  • Showing premises are false or questionable
  • Showing reasoning is flawed
  • Introducing alternative explanations
  • Challenging assumptions

1.6 Inference Questions

Types

  1. Must be true: The conclusion necessarily follows
  2. Could be true: Possible but not certain
  3. Cannot be true: Contradicts the passage
  4. Best conclusion: Most supported

Approach

  1. Find the stated information
  2. Determine what MUST follow logically
  3. Eliminate answers that add information NOT in passage
  4. Select the answer that is best supported

1.7 NMAT High-Yield Points

Commonly Asked:

  1. Premise: Evidence/facts; Conclusion: Claim being proved
  2. Conclusion signals: therefore, thus, hence, consequently
  3. Premise signals: because, since, for, as
  4. Ad hominem: Attacking person instead of argument
  5. Straw man: Misrepresenting opponent’s argument
  6. False cause: Assuming correlation = causation
  7. Hasty generalization: Too few examples for conclusion
  8. Assumption: Must be true for argument to work
  9. Circular reasoning: Conclusion in premise
  10. Evaluate: Truth of premises + Logic of reasoning