Statement: The match was cancelled due to rain. Conclusions: I. It rained on the match day. II. The match would have been played if there was no rain. MCQ with Answer and Explanation
Statement: The match was cancelled due to rain. Conclusions: I. It rained on the match day. II. The match would have been played if there was no rain.
A. Neither I nor II follows
B. Only I follows
C. Only II follows
D. Both I and II follow
Answer: Option B
Solution (By JKSSB Mock Tests)
I directly follows. II seems plausible but cancellation could have other reasons; the statement doesn't confirm rain was the only factor. So I is safest.
Statements:
1. No student is a teacher.
2. All teachers are principals.
Conclusions:
I. No student is a principal.
II. Some principals are teachers.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
Explanation:
While no student is a teacher, the principal category could still encompass students outside of the teacher category. Therefore, I does not strictly follow. Since all teachers are principals, it is a fact that some principals are teachers (Conclusion II).
Explanation:
I: fish is meat, so it's plausible, but the statement doesn't guarantee it; some cats may not eat fish. II is a reverse error. Neither follows logically from the given statement.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!