Statement:
All employees of this company are highly educated.
Conclusions:
I. The company only hires individuals with advanced degrees.
II. An uneducated person cannot be an employee of this company.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
Explanation:
The statement says all current employees are highly educated, which implies an uneducated person is not among them (Conclusion II follows). However, 'highly educated' does not necessarily mean 'advanced degrees' (Ph.D., Master's, etc.), so Conclusion I is an over-assumption.
Statement:
Only good singers are invited to the conference. Voice is a good singer.
Conclusions:
I. Voice is invited to the conference.
II. All invited people are good singers.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
Explanation:
The statement says 'only good singers are invited', which translates to 'All invited people are good singers' (II follows). However, it does not say *all* good singers are invited. Voice is a good singer, but might not be invited. Thus, I does not strictly follow.
Statement:
The government has increased taxes on luxury cars to boost revenue.
Conclusions:
I. Luxury cars will become more expensive for buyers.
II. Revenue of the government will definitely increase.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
Explanation:
Increasing taxes on a product directly increases its final cost to the buyer, so I follows. However, an increase in tax does not guarantee an increase in overall revenue, as sales volume might drop significantly. Therefore, II is not a definite conclusion.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!