Statement - Conclusions Questions and Answers

Answer: A

The two statements that cannot both be true are Statement 1 and Statement 3.

'All students are inquisitive' and 'No student is inquisitive' are contraries: with at least one student in the class, that student would have to be both inquisitive and not inquisitive.

The other pairs can hold together. If all students are inquisitive, then some students are inquisitive too, so 1 and 2 are compatible. 'Some are' and 'some are not' are both true in a mixed class, so 2 and 4 are compatible. If no student is inquisitive, then certainly some students are not, so 3 and 4 are compatible.

Answer: D

The certain inference is that the Government of Zombieland believes that riding bicycles is a form of physical exercise.

The experts named a lack of physical exercise as a leading cause of the health problems, and the government's response to that finding is to pay people to cycle to work. That measure only makes sense if the government regards cycling as exercise, so this belief is the assumption the passage rests on.

The other options go beyond the text. An incentive does not mean everyone 'will henceforth' cycle. Lack of exercise was only one of the leading causes, so cycling cannot 'ensure' everyone is free of health issues. And nothing says the experts suggested making cycling mandatory; the government chose incentives, not compulsion.

Answer: B

The third statement is False.

From the first two statements: Cliff is older than Tanya, and Tanya is older than Eric. So Cliff is older than Eric, and the order by age is Cliff, Tanya, Eric.

The third statement, 'Eric is older than Cliff', says the opposite, so it must be false. It is not uncertain, and the data are not insufficient, because the first two statements fix the order completely.

Answer: B

The inference is that Steve was known to play better than Mark.

James concedes he may not be good enough for his country but claims to be the best player in his own family. The jibe only works as a retort if Mark is not the best player in his own family, and Mark's family includes his famous brother Steve. So James is implying that Steve is the better player.

Nothing compares James with Mark or Steve directly, so "Mark played better than James" and "James played better than Steve" do not follow, and nothing at all suggests James and Steve were friends.

Answer: D

The best inference is that the advertisement is not gender-discriminatory.

It asks for 'persons', and its only requirements are a high school pass and availability for day, evening and Saturday work. Nothing in it excludes or prefers either sex.

For the same reason 'gender-discriminatory' is unsupported. 'Xenophobic' would need some bar on foreigners or outsiders, and there is none. 'Not designed to make the post attractive' is contradicted by the advertisement itself, which offers paid transport and reimbursed expenses.

Answer: C

It definitely implies that Ajay and his parents live in a flat.

The parents said a dog would not be happy 'in their flat', which states directly that the family lives in a flat. That is the only conclusion the passage makes certain.

Nothing is said about which animal the parents like better: they refused the dog because of the dog's happiness, not their own preference, so neither of the options about the parents liking birds or dogs follows. Ajay accepting a pet bird suggests, if anything, that he does not dislike birds.

Answer: B

The statements imply that some people are smart and hardworking.

The second statement says that some smart people are hardworking. Those people are, of course, people who are both smart and hardworking, so at least some people are smart and hardworking.

'All hardworking people are smart' and 'All smart people are hardworking' turn 'some' into 'all', which never follows. 'Smart people are generally hardworking' claims that most are, which also goes beyond 'some'.

Answer: D

The answer is All of these.

The statement tells users never to use pirated or unlicensed software and to use free and open source software instead. Each option follows from that advice: pirated software is illegal to use, which is why it is ruled out; FOSS is offered as the safe, lawful alternative; and choosing licensed or open source software is the ethical practice the statement promotes.

Since each of the first three conclusions can be drawn, choosing any one of them alone would leave out the others.

Answer: C

The key takes both conclusion I and conclusion II as valid.

The statement comes from the standard textbook description of a video digitiser, a device that captures frames from a video camera or recorder and converts them to digital images. The same description goes on to say that the captured images can then be printed on paper, and that a fast computer with a large memory is needed, because digitised images are large files.

Read in that light, both conclusions describe the device correctly, so the options accepting only one of them, or neither, are not the keyed answer.

Answer: D

The answer is Neither Conclusion I nor II follows.

Take a class of 100: 60 boys and 40 girls, 80 who play sports and 40 who live in the hostel.

• The 40 hostel places could all be girls, but they could equally be boys or a mix, so 'All girls stay in hostel' is not certain.
• The 20 students who do not play sports could be boys, girls or both, so nothing fixes the share of girls who do not play. 'Twenty percent of girls' is not established either.

Each conclusion is possible, but neither must be true, which is what 'follows' requires.