1. Deductive vs Inductive Reasoning 🧠
Dalawang uri ng pag-iisip na kailangan mo as investigator!
Deductive Reasoning (Top-Down)
General Rule → Specific Conclusion
Example:
Premise 1: All criminals leave evidence.
Premise 2: Juan is a criminal.
Conclusion: Juan left evidence. ✓
If premises are true, conclusion is GUARANTEED true.
Inductive Reasoning (Bottom-Up)
Specific Observations → General Rule
Example:
Case 1: Suspect A was near the scene.
Case 2: Suspect A has motive.
Conclusion: Suspect A is likely guilty. (Probable)
Conclusion is PROBABLE, not guaranteed.
🔍 Police Application:
Deductive: Use laws/rules to determine if an act is criminal.
Inductive: Gather clues to build a case against a suspect.
2. Syllogisms: The Classic Logic Structure 📐
Tol, ito ang foundation ng logical arguments. Master mo 'to!
Structure ng Syllogism:
Major Premise: General statement (All A are B)
Minor Premise: Specific statement (C is A)
Conclusion: Logical result (Therefore, C is B)
✅ Valid Syllogism:
All police officers carry badges.
Juan is a police officer.
∴ Juan carries a badge. ✓
❌ Invalid Syllogism:
All criminals wear black.
Juan wears black.
∴ Juan is a criminal. ✗
(Fallacy: Affirming the consequent)
📋 Types of Categorical Statements:
"All S are P" - All police are honest
"No S are P" - No criminals are innocent
"Some S are P" - Some officers are female
"Some S are not P" - Some cases are not solved
3. Conditional Statements (If-Then) ➡️
Pag may condition, may consequence. Understand the logic!
Standard Form: If P, then Q
✅ Modus Ponens (Affirming the Antecedent)
If it rains, the ground is wet.
It is raining.
∴ The ground is wet. (VALID)
✅ Modus Tollens (Denying the Consequent)
If it rains, the ground is wet.
The ground is not wet.
∴ It is not raining. (VALID)
❌ Affirming the Consequent (FALLACY)
If it rains, the ground is wet.
The ground is wet.
∴ It is raining. (INVALID - could be sprinkler!)
❌ Denying the Antecedent (FALLACY)
If it rains, the ground is wet.
It is not raining.
∴ The ground is not wet. (INVALID - other causes!)
4. Logical Fallacies to Avoid ⚠️
Tol, wag ka magpadala sa maling arguments! Kilala mo ang mga 'to:
Common Fallacies:
Attacking the person, not the argument
Conclusion from too few examples
Only 2 options when there are more
"Expert said so" without evidence
More Fallacies:
Using conclusion as a premise
Misrepresenting opponent's argument
Introducing irrelevant topic
Assuming extreme consequences
5. Assumption & Conclusion Analysis 🎯
Sa exam, madalas may tanong about hidden assumptions!
💡 Identifying Hidden Assumptions:
Look for unstated premises that connect the evidence to the conclusion.
Example:
"The suspect was seen near the crime scene. He must be guilty."
Hidden Assumption: Being near a crime scene means involvement.
Reality: Proximity ≠ Guilt
📝 Tips for Assumption Questions:
- • Ask: "What must be true for this conclusion to be valid?"
- • Look for gaps between premises and conclusion
- • Check if the assumption, if false, would destroy the argument
- • Be wary of words like "all", "never", "always"
6. Logical Sequence & Pattern Recognition 🔢
Series questions - favorite sa NAPOLCOM exam!
Number Patterns:
2, 4, 6, 8, ___ → 10 (Add 2)
3, 6, 12, 24, ___ → 48 (×2)
1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, ___ → 13 (Fibonacci)
2, 6, 12, 20, ___ → 30 (n² + n)
Letter Patterns:
A, C, E, G, ___ → I (Skip 1)
AZ, BY, CX, ___ → DW
ACE, BDF, CEG, ___ → DFH
🎯 Practice: Complete the Series
1. 5, 10, 20, 40, ___
Answer
80 (×2 each time)
2. 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, ___
Answer
36 (Perfect squares: 1², 2², 3²...)
🎯 Exam Strategy for Logical Reasoning
Winning Tips, Tol:
📖 Read Carefully:
- • Identify premises vs conclusion
- • Watch for qualifier words
- • Don't add your own assumptions
🧠 Analyze Systematically:
- • Test each answer choice
- • Eliminate obviously wrong options
- • Check for logical validity
Utak ang pangunahing sandata ng mabuting pulis, Tol! 🧠💪