1. From the statement and two assumptions 1 and 2 given below, identify the assumption(s) that is/are implicit in the statement.
Statement: Highly brilliant and industrious students do not always excel in the written examination
Assumption 1: The written examination is good mainly for mediocre students
Assumption 2: The brilliant and industrious students cannot always write good answers in the exam.
(1) 1 only
(2) 2 only
(3) Both [1] and 2
(4) Neither 1 nor 2
Explanation
The statement is: “Highly brilliant and industrious students do not always excel in the written examination.”
Assumption 1: “The written examination is good mainly for mediocre students.”
- This assumption is not supported by the statement. The statement doesn’t imply that written examinations are primarily suitable for mediocre students.
Assumption 2: “The brilliant and industrious students cannot always write good answers in the exam.”
- This assumption aligns with the statement, which suggests that even highly brilliant and industrious students may not always excel in written exams.
Therefore, the correct answer is:
(2) 2 only
2. From the statement and two arguments 1 and 2 given below, identify the argument(s) that hold(s) strong as per the situation described in the statement.
Statement; Should students union in universities be abolished?
Argument 1: Yes. Students can pay full attention to their career development. 2: No. All great leaders had been student’s union leaders.
(1) 1 only
(2) 2 only
(3) either 1 or 2
(4) neither 1 nor 2
Explanation
The strength of an argument depends on how well it logically supports the given statement.
Statement: Should students union in universities be abolished?
Argument 1: Yes. Students can pay full attention to their career development.
- This argument suggests that abolishing student unions would allow students to focus entirely on their career development. This is a valid point related to the potential benefits of not having student unions.
Argument 2: No. All great leaders had been student’s union leaders.
- This argument does not directly address the question of whether student unions should be abolished. It provides an example of great leaders who were once student union leaders, but it doesn’t necessarily argue against abolishing student unions.
Based on the relevance to the statement, Argument 1 is stronger as it directly addresses the impact on students’ career development in the context of abolishing student unions.
Therefore, the correct answer is:
(1) 1 only
3. A statement is followed by two inferences 1 and 2. Considering the statement to be true, which of the inferences 1 and 2 logically follow?
Statement: In a T-20 cricket match, the number of runs scored by the Indian team were 212 and out of these 160 runs were scored by spinners.
Inference: 1. 10% of Indian team cosist of spinners.
2. The opening batters were spinners
(1) 1 only
(2) 2 only
(3) Both 1 and 2
(4) Neither 1 nor 2
Explanation
Let’s analyze the statement and the inferences:
Statement: In a T-20 cricket match, the number of runs scored by the Indian team were 212, and out of these, 160 runs were scored by spinners.
Inference 1: 10% of the Indian team consists of spinners.
- This inference cannot be logically deduced from the statement. The statement only provides information about the number of runs scored by spinners, not the percentage of spinners in the team.
Inference 2: The opening batters were spinners.
- This inference also cannot be logically deduced from the statement. The statement does not provide information about the batting order or whether spinners were the opening batters.
Therefore, neither Inference 1 nor Inference 2 logically follows from the given statement.
The correct answer is:
(4) Neither 1 nor 2
Leave a Reply