Directions: In each question below are given two statements followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to take the given two statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly knows facts. Read the conclusion and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the two given statements, disregarding commonly known facts.

Give answer

a. If only Conclusion I follows

b. If only Conclusion II follows

c. If either conclusion I or II follows

d. If either conclusion I nor II follows

e. If both Conclusions I and II follow

Q1. Statements: All men are dogs. All dogs are cats.

Conclusions: I. All men are cats. II. All cats are men [RRB, 2005]

Answer

Answer – (a)

Explanation –

Since both the premises are universal and affirmative, the conclusion must be universal affirmative. However, conclusion II, being an A-type proposition, distributes the term ‘goats’. Since the term ‘goats’ is distributed in II without being distributed in any of the premises, so conclusion II cannot follow. Thus, only I follows 

Q2. Statements: All film stars are playback singers. All film directors are film stars.

Conclusions: I. All film directors are playback singers. II. Some film stars are film directors.[GBO, 2006]

Answer

Answer – (e)

Explanation –

Since both the premises are universal and affirmative, the conclusion must be universal affirmative and should not contain the middle term. So, I follows IIis the converse of the second premise and so it also holds.

Q3. Statements: All pens are roads. All roads are houses.

Conclusions: I. All houses are pens. II. Some houses are pens. [Bank Recruitment, 2005]

Answer

Answer – (b)

Explanation –

Since both the premises are universal and affirmative, the conclusion must be universal affirmative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that ‘All pens are houses’. II is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds. Since the term ‘houses’ is distributed in I without being distributed in any of the premises, so I does not follow

Q4. Statements: All huts are mansions. All mansions are temples.

Conclusions: I. SOme temples are huts. II. Some temples are mansions. [RBI, 2003]

Answer

Answer – (e)

Explanation –

As discussed above, it follows that ‘All huts are temples’. I is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds. II is the converse of the second premise and so it also holds.

Q5. Statements: All water is divine. All temples are divine.

Conclusions: I. All water is temple. II. All temples are water. [PGDBM, 2002]

Answer

Answer – (d)

Explanation –

Since the middle term ‘divine’ is not distributed even once in the premises, no definite conclusion can be drawn.

Q6. Statements: All cars are cats. All fans are cats.

Conclusions: I. All cars are fans. II. Some fans are cars. [MBA, 2004] 

Answer

Answer – (d)

Explanation –

Since the middle term ‘cats’ is not distributed even once in the premises, no definite conclusion follows.

Q7. Statements: All pens are chalks. All chairs are chalks.

Conclusions: I. Some pens are chairs. II. Some chalks are pens. [Bank Recruitment, 2005]

Answer

Answer – (b)

Explanation –

Since the middle term ‘chalks’ is not distributed even once in the premises, no definite conclusion follows. However, II is the converse of the first premise and so it holds.

Q8. Statements: All good athletes win. All good athletes eat well.

Conclusions: I. All those who eat well are good athletes. II. All those who win eat well. [Hotel Management, 2004]

Answer

Answer – (d)

Explanation –

Since the middle term ‘good athletes’ is distributed twice in the premises, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that ‘Some of those who win, eat well’.

Q9. Statements: Every minister is a student. Every student is inexperienced.

Conclusions: I. Every minister is inexperienced. II. Some inexperienced are students. [MAT, 2003]

Answer

Answer – (e)

Explanation –

‘Every’ is equivalent to ‘All’. Thus, since both the premises are universal and affirmative, the conclusion must be universal affirmative and should not contain the middle term. So, I follows. II is the converse of the second premise and thus it also holds.

Q10. Statements: All tubes are handles. All cups are handles.

Conclusions: I. All cups are tubes. II. Some handles are not cups.

Answer

Answer – (d)

Explanation –

Both the premises are A type propositions. So, in either, the middle term ‘handles’ forming the predicate is not distributed. Since the middle term is not distributed even once in the premises, no definite conclusion follows.

Share it
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •