PK
9共\ _rels/PK
9共\ docProps/PK
9共\ ppt/PK
9共\
ppt/_rels/PK
9共\ ppt/charts/PK
9共\ ppt/charts/_rels/PK
9共\ ppt/embeddings/PK
9共\
ppt/media/PK
9共\ ppt/slideLayouts/PK
9共\ ppt/slideLayouts/_rels/PK
9共\ ppt/slideMasters/PK
9共\ ppt/slideMasters/_rels/PK
9共\ ppt/slides/PK
9共\ ppt/slides/_rels/PK
9共\
ppt/theme/PK
9共\ ppt/notesMasters/PK
9共\ ppt/notesMasters/_rels/PK
9共\ ppt/notesSlides/PK
9共\ ppt/notesSlides/_rels/PK
9共\}ムヌ> ヌ> [Content_Types].xml
PK
9共\ワネ] ] _rels/.rels
PK
9共\:・ docProps/app.xml
0
0
Microsoft Office PowerPoint
On-screen Show (16:9)
0
33
33
0
0
false
Fonts Used
2
Theme
1
Slide Titles
33
Arial
Calibri
Office Theme
Slide 1Slide 2Slide 3Slide 4Slide 5Slide 6Slide 7Slide 8Slide 9Slide 10Slide 11Slide 12Slide 13Slide 14Slide 15Slide 16Slide 17Slide 18Slide 19Slide 20Slide 21Slide 22Slide 23Slide 24Slide 25Slide 26Slide 27Slide 28Slide 29Slide 30Slide 31Slide 32Slide 33
PptxGenJS
false
false
false
16.0000
PK
9共\~゚ホフ docProps/core.xml
PptxGenJS Presentation
PptxGenJS Presentation
PptxGenJS
PptxGenJS
1
2026-05-04T17:25:51Z
2026-05-04T17:25:51Z
PK
9共\〇Dォ= = ppt/_rels/presentation.xml.rels
PK
9共\Oンィヘ ヘ ppt/theme/theme1.xmlPK
9共\-<サ サ ppt/presentation.xml
PK
9共\X寳ツ ppt/presProps.xml
PK
9共\リ刻カ カ ppt/tableStyles.xml
PK
9共\D
>0 0 ppt/viewProps.xml
PK
9共\H7tッ ッ ! ppt/slideLayouts/slideLayout1.xml
PK
9共\ユム提7 7 , ppt/slideLayouts/_rels/slideLayout1.xml.rels
PK
9共\8 2 ppt/slides/slide1.xml
CLAT GURUKUL ツキ CLAT 2027CRITICAL REASONINGValidity, Scope &the Author's MindTruth vs Validity ツキ Strong vs Weak ツキ Scope ツキ Inferences vs Assumptions ツキ Indicator WordsClass 03 ツキ Duration: 2 hours ツキ Anurag SirPK
9共\>D Ч X ppt/slides/_rels/slide1.xml.rels
PK
9共\.囹草 ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide1.xml
1PK
9共\サ:Aヒ ヒ * ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide1.xml.rels
PK
9共\{サ棘ツZ ツZ ppt/slides/slide2.xml
Recap 窶 What We Covered in Class 02Quick RecallCLAT Gurukul ツキ Critical Reasoning ツキ Class 03Anurag Sir2CLASS 02 (Done)Premises & ConclusionsAdditional Premise indicatorsCounter-Premises & rebuttalsComplex Arguments 窶 sub-conclusionsThe "Some People Claim窶ヲ" deviceConclusion Identification MethodCLASS 03 (Today)Truth vs ValidityStrong vs Weak argumentsScope 窶 narrow vs wideInferences vs AssumptionsQuantity & Probability indicatorsPK
9共\ォア]X X ppt/slides/_rels/slide2.xml.rels
PK
9共\ルタキ ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide2.xml
2PK
9共\xユキヒ ヒ * ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide2.xml.rels
PK
9共\ァS赱J ゚J ppt/slides/slide3.xml
Today's Mission 窶 From Structure to QualityConcept PathCLAT Gurukul ツキ Critical Reasoning ツキ Class 03Anurag Sir3Class 02 taught you to MAP an argument. Today you learn to JUDGE it.STEP 1Is it VALID?Does the conclusion follow from the premises 窶 regardless of whether the premises are true in the real world?STEP 2Is it STRONG?How tightly do the premises support the conclusion? Tight = strong. Loose = weak.STEP 3Is it IN-SCOPE?Do the premises and the conclusion talk about the SAME thing? Or has the author quietly shifted ground?Today's questions: Will it survive scrutiny? Where would I attack? What is the author quietly assuming?PK
9共\鈞ケツX X ppt/slides/_rels/slide3.xml.rels
PK
9共\K|ナ ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide3.xml
3PK
9共\9Yルヒ ヒ * ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide3.xml.rels
PK
9共\M襤捉> ィ> ppt/slides/slide4.xml
Truth vs Validity 窶 The Core DistinctionConcept 1 of 5CLAT Gurukul ツキ Critical Reasoning ツキ Class 03Anurag Sir4Validity asks whether the conclusion FOLLOWS from the premises. Truth asks whether the premises match the world.TRUTHReal-world correspondence. Is the statement actually true?VALIDITYLogical follow-through. Given the premises, does the conclusion hold?CLAT TESTSVALIDITY ALMOST ALWAYS. Accept premises as given; judge the link.A passage with FALSE premises but VALID logic = correct CLAT answer. A passage with TRUE premises but a logical leap = wrong CLAT answer.PK
9共\タ\良X X ppt/slides/_rels/slide4.xml.rels
PK
9共\vs ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide4.xml
4PK
9共\ソJヒ ヒ * ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide4.xml.rels
PK
9共\ロテエB B ppt/slides/slide5.xml
Truth vs Validity 窶 Worked ExampleIndian ContextCLAT Gurukul ツキ Critical Reasoning ツキ Class 03Anurag Sir5PASSAGEEvery Supreme Court judge has presided over a Constitution Bench. Justice Y has presided over a Constitution Bench. Therefore, Justice Y is a Supreme Court judge.VALIDITY CHECKAll SC judges 竊 Constitution Bench.Justice Y 竊 Constitution Bench.Does Y have to be SC?NO. Mistaken Reversal 窶 High Court judges sit on Constitution Benches too.TRUTH CHECKAre the premises factually true?Maybe 窶 Justice Y's record can be checked.But TRUTH does not save an INVALID argument.Verdict: INVALID, regardless of truth.PK
9共\
s X X ppt/slides/_rels/slide5.xml.rels
PK
9共\荳W8 ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide5.xml
5PK
9共\Q eヒ ヒ * ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide5.xml.rels
PK
9共\w辛忘 忘 ppt/slides/slide6.xml
Strong vs Weak ArgumentsConcept 2 of 5CLAT Gurukul ツキ Critical Reasoning ツキ Class 03Anurag Sir6STRENGTH measures HOW TIGHTLY the premises support the conclusion. Validity is binary; STRENGTH is a slider.THE STRENGTH SLIDERVERY WEAKWEAKSTRONGVERY STRONGFour questions to grade an argument1Are there UNSTATED steps the conclusion needs?2Are the premises representative 窶 sample size, geography, time?3Could a SINGLE counterexample destroy the conclusion?4Has the author SHIFTED scope (talking about A then concluding about B)?PK
9共\.々 X ppt/slides/_rels/slide6.xml.rels
PK
9共\窘ォ ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide6.xml
6PK
9共\=|磐ヒ ヒ * ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide6.xml.rels
PK
9共\]xウ#f9 f9 ppt/slides/slide7.xml
Strong vs Weak 窶 GST Reform EditorialWalkthroughCLAT Gurukul ツキ Critical Reasoning ツキ Class 03Anurag Sir7PASSAGEA 2026 NCAER survey of 240 SMEs in Gujarat reported that monthly GST compliance time fell from 14 hours to 6 hours after the Council's rate-rationalisation. Therefore, India's entire MSME ecosystem has benefited from the GST simplification.STRENGTH RATINGVERY WEAKWhy?窶「 240 SMEs 窶 tiny sample窶「 ONE state (Gujarat) 窶 not all-India窶「 "Compliance time" 竕 all benefits窶「 8-month window 竕 "ecosystem"Scope leap: data covers a slice; conclusion claims the whole.PK
9共\UゥハOX X ppt/slides/_rels/slide7.xml.rels
PK
9共\)アl ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide7.xml
7PK
9共\|gクヒ ヒ * ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide7.xml.rels
PK
9共\ LJテ テ ppt/slides/slide8.xml
"Validity asks: did the train arrive? Truth asks: was the train scheduled? CLAT asks only the first.窶 Critical Reasoning, Class 038PK
9共\6ツ・ホ ホ ppt/slides/_rels/slide8.xml.rels
PK
9共\iゴ ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide8.xml
8PK
9共\pOィヒ ヒ * ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide8.xml.rels
PK
9共\ハヘフ> > ppt/slides/slide9.xml
PART 2SCOPENarrow vs Wide. The single most common reason students get a CLAT LR question wrong.9PK
9共\ァ>$ホ ホ ppt/slides/_rels/slide9.xml.rels
PK
9共\ルq ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide9.xml
9PK
9共\1テニヒ ヒ * ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide9.xml.rels
PK
9共\セ毬曵5 I5 ppt/slides/slide10.xml
What is Scope?Concept 3 of 5CLAT Gurukul ツキ Critical Reasoning ツキ Class 03Anurag Sir10SCOPEScope is the RANGE of ideas, people, places, time-periods or conditions that a premise 窶 or a conclusion 窶 actually covers.Two kinds of scope problem on CLAT1. NARROW PREMISE 竊 WIDE CONCLUSIONPremise covers Bihar; conclusion claims India. The author has shifted from a slice to the whole.2. WIDE PREMISE 竊 NARROW CONCLUSIONGlobal trend is offered as evidence for a claim about a single Indian state 窶 the global premise rarely binds the local case.PK
9共\マテgZ Z ! ppt/slides/_rels/slide10.xml.rels
PK
9共\Oク ppt/notesSlides/notesSlide10.xml
10PK
9共\トT愬フ フ + ppt/notesSlides/_rels/notesSlide10.xml.rels
PK
9共\メY]ネeA eA ppt/slides/slide11.xml
Scope Mismatch 窶 A Live ExampleHeatwave EditorialCLAT Gurukul ツキ Critical Reasoning ツキ Class 03Anurag Sir11CLAIMDelhi recorded 49ツーC in May 2026. Therefore, India must immediately mandate climate adaptation in every state's building code.PREMISE 窶 narrow scopeGeography: 1 city (Delhi)Time: 1 month (May 2026)Metric: peak temperatureCovers: ONE data point.CONCLUSION 窶 wide scopeGeography: every stateTime: indefinite futureMetric: building code mandateCovers: 28 STATES + 8 UTs.PK
9共\ノ