Statement and Conclusions - Expert Level
Practice and master this topic with our carefully crafted questions.
In each question below is given a statement followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true, then consider the two conclusions together and decide which of them logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given in the statement.
Give answer:
(A) If only conclusion I follows
(B) If only conclusion II follows
(C) If either I or II follows
(D) If neither I nor II follows and
(E) If both I and II follow.
Statements: Women's organisations in India have welcomed the
amendment of the Industrial Employment Rules 1946 to curb sexual harassment at
the work place.
Conclusions:
I.
Sexual harassment of
women at work place is more prevalent in India as compared to other developed
countries.
II.
Many organisations in
India will stop recruiting women to avoid such problems.
The fact that a certain rule has been more welcomed in a certain country does not imply that the problem is more prevalent there. So, I does not follow. Also, the amendment seeks to discourage only sexual harassment of women and shall in no way discourage employment of women. So, II also does not follow.
Clearly, the statement talks of Company X only and no other company. So, I does not follow. Also, it is mentioned that one can take a good shot even in bad weather conditions with a camera of Company X. So, II follows.
According to the statement, 80% of the total runs were made by spinners. So, I does not follow.Nothing about the opening batsman is mentioned in the statement. So, II also does not follow.
The statement is a symbolic one and only II correctly explains it.
According to the statement, good wranglers are wise men. But it doesn't mean that all wise man are good wranglers. So, neither I nor II follows.
Clearly, the new scheme intends to develop interest in reading by incorporating the habit in their routine. So, only II follows while I does not.
Neither the citizens' response to the decision nor the reason for opposition by other nations can deduced from the statement. So, neither I nor II follows.
According to the statement, previous experience is an essential condition for candidates but in case of outstanding candidates, this condition shall be waived. This means that some candidates will have previous experience while some will not. So, both I and II follow.
According to the statement, National Aluminium Company has moved India from a position of shortage in the past to self-sufficiency in the present. This means that previously, India had to import aluminium. So, I follows. Also, it can also be deduced that if production increases at the same rate, India can export it in future. So, II also follows.
The slogan given in the statement is definitely a catchy one which indicates that catchy slogan do attract people. So, I does not follow. Nothing about people's preference for colours can be deduced from the statement. Thus, II also does not follow.