Evaluating whether a conclusion logically follows from a given statement — using only the information provided, not real-world assumptions.
📖 ~11 min read🧩 SSC Reasoning
Introduction
Statement and Conclusion questions test pure logical deduction — you must judge whether a conclusion
follows strictly from the given statement alone, setting aside general knowledge, personal
opinion, or "common sense" assumptions.
Diagram — Statement as the Only Source of Truth
Every conclusion is tested against the statement ALONE — real-world truth or general knowledge is irrelevant to this judgment.
Flowchart — Evaluating a Conclusion
Read the Statement — treat it as the ONLY known fact
↓
Ask: "Does the conclusion follow using ONLY logical deduction from this statement?"
↓
YES → Conclusion follows
NO (needs outside info/assumption) → Conclusion does not follow
Core Rule
💡 Golden Rule: Never use outside/general knowledge to judge a conclusion — even if a conclusion seems factually true in the real world, it "does not follow" if it cannot be logically derived from the given statement alone.
Q. Statement: All the government offices in the city will remain closed on Sunday due to a public holiday. Conclusion I: There is no public holiday on any day other than Sunday. Conclusion II: All employees will get a day off on Sunday.
I. The statement only mentions Sunday's holiday, says nothing about other days having no holidays → does not follow (assumes information not given)
II. Government offices being closed implies their employees get the day off → follows directly from the statement
Conclusion is a direct or clearly implied restatement of the given facts
Definitely False
Conclusion directly contradicts the given statement
Cannot Say / Data Inadequate
The statement doesn't provide enough information to confirm or deny the conclusion either way
Q. Statement: The price of onions has doubled in the last month due to heavy rainfall damaging the crop. Conclusion: The price of onions will remain high forever.
The statement explains a temporary cause (rainfall damage) for a price increase — it gives no information about future/permanent pricing
Answer: Cannot Say / Does not follow
Common Traps
Over-generalisation: Statement about a specific instance being extended to "all" or "always."
Reverse causation: Statement says A causes B; conclusion wrongly assumes B causes A.
Real-world bias: A conclusion that "sounds correct" from general knowledge but isn't actually supported by the statement's specific wording.
✅ Practice Focus: Treating the statement as the sole source of truth (ignore outside knowledge) · Definitely True vs Definitely False vs Cannot Say classification · Spotting over-generalisation and reverse-causation traps.