Examius
🇵🇰 NTS NAT-IM · flashcards
NTS NAT-IM Analytical Reasoning Flashcards
51 question-and-answer cards covering Analytical Reasoning as it is examined in NTS NAT-IM. 24 of them are printed below, taken from across the deck — no signup, no paywall on the preview.
24 sample cards from the Analytical Reasoning deck
Sampled from the end of the deck, so these are different cards from the ones shown on the syllabus page.
What is a conditional (if-then) statement in logical terms?
A statement of the form "If P then Q" (P → Q), where P is the sufficient condition (antecedent) and Q is the necessary condition (consequent).
In "If P then Q," which is the sufficient condition and which is the necessary condition?
P is sufficient (its truth guarantees Q); Q is necessary (it must hold for P to be true). P triggers Q, not the reverse.
What does "P only if Q" translate to in if-then form?
P → Q. "Only if" introduces the necessary condition, so Q is necessary for P.
How do you translate "All A are B" into conditional form?
A → B (if something is an A, then it is a B).
How do you translate "No A are B" into conditional form?
A → not-B (and equivalently B → not-A).
What is the contrapositive of the statement "If P then Q"?
"If not-Q then not-P" (not-Q → not-P). It is logically equivalent to the original and always shares its truth value.
Why is the contrapositive a valid inference but the converse is not?
The contrapositive (not-Q → not-P) is logically equivalent to P → Q, whereas the converse (Q → P) reverses the relationship and does not follow.
What is the converse of "If P then Q," and why is asserting it a fallacy?
The converse is "If Q then P." Asserting it commits the fallacy of affirming the consequent, since Q can be true for reasons other than P.
What is the inverse of "If P then Q," and is it valid?
The inverse is "If not-P then not-Q." It is not a valid inference (it is the contrapositive of the invalid converse) and commits denying the antecedent.
What is "modus ponens"?
A valid form: given P → Q and P is true, conclude Q is true. (Affirming the antecedent.)
What is "modus tollens"?
A valid form: given P → Q and Q is false (not-Q), conclude P is false (not-P). (Denying the consequent.)
How do you build an inference chain from "A → B" and "B → C"?
By hypothetical syllogism, link them into A → C; the contrapositive chain is not-C → not-B → not-A.
When combining the conditionals A → B and not-B → D, what useful chain results?
Take the contrapositive of the first (not-B → not-A) and combine with not-B → D; whenever B is false, both not-A and D follow.
When two conditions overlap, how do you find what is forced?
Apply each rule's trigger, then propagate consequences through every linked conditional (and its contrapositive) until no new deductions appear.
What is the difference between "and" and "or" when combining conditions in a consequent?
"P → (Q and R)" requires both Q and R; "P → (Q or R)" requires at least one of Q or R, so failing both Q and R forces not-P.
In a logic argument, what is the distinction between a "premise" and a "conclusion"?
A premise is a stated reason/evidence offered as support; the conclusion is the claim the premises are meant to establish.
How can you identify the conclusion of an argument?
Look for conclusion indicators (therefore, thus, hence, so, consequently) or ask which statement the others are given to support.
What is a "valid" conclusion in deductive reasoning?
One that must be true if all the premises are true; the conclusion follows with logical necessity, not merely plausibility.
What is the difference between a conclusion that "must be true" and one that "could be true"?
"Must be true" holds in every possible arrangement consistent with the premises; "could be true" holds in at least one such arrangement.
What is an assumption in an argument?
An unstated premise the argument takes for granted and needs in order for its conclusion to follow from the stated premises.
What is a "necessary assumption" and how do you test for one?
An assumption the argument requires to hold; test it with the negation test: if negating the statement destroys the argument, it is a necessary assumption.
What does it mean to "strengthen" an argument?
To add information that makes the conclusion more likely to follow from the premises, often by supporting an assumption or ruling out an alternative explanation.
What does it mean to "weaken" an argument?
To add information that makes the conclusion less likely, typically by attacking an assumption, offering an alternative cause, or showing the evidence does not support the claim.
In cause-and-effect reasoning, what three alternatives can undermine a claim that "A causes B"?
(1) Reverse causation: B actually causes A; (2) a third factor C causes both A and B; (3) the correlation is coincidence. Each weakens the causal claim.
What this deck covers
The Analytical Reasoning deck follows the NTS NAT-IM Analytical Reasoning syllabus — 5 chapters and 18 topics — so questions land on material that is genuinely examinable rather than trivia around it. That works out to roughly 10.2 cards per chapter.
Answers are written to be recallable, not just readable — averaging about 122 characters, which is long enough to carry the reasoning and short enough to say out loud.
A deck like this earns its keep on the second and third pass. Read the syllabus first so you know the shape of the subject, then use the cards to find the specific facts that have not stuck.
Analytical Reasoning flashcards FAQ
How many Analytical Reasoning flashcards are in this NTS NAT-IM deck?
51 cards. This page previews 24 of them, sampled evenly across the deck so you can judge the difficulty before installing anything.
Are these NTS NAT-IM flashcards free?
Yes. The preview here is free to read with no signup, and the full 51-card deck is free inside the Examius app.
What do the Analytical Reasoning cards cover?
They follow the NTS NAT-IM Analytical Reasoning syllabus — 5 chapters and 18 topics — so the questions track what is actually examinable.
How should I use these flashcards?
Read the syllabus first so you know the shape of the subject, then drill the deck. Examius schedules each card with spaced repetition, so cards you keep missing come back sooner and ones you know drift further apart.