Question - Statements Questions and Answers

Answer: A

Correct answer: If only assumption I is inplicit

The promise is that the buyer will now be able to prepare dishes he could not prepare before, which locates the obstacle in the equipment rather than in the cook - so the advertisement assumes he already knows the recipes and lacked only a proper oven. Assumption II claims exclusivity for the brand, which the advertisement suggests as a selling point but does not need to assume; its appeal works equally well if other ovens would also serve.

Answer: C

Correct answer: No museum is without display pieces.

This is the same statement turned around: if every museum displays interesting pieces, then none is without them. The reformulation is safe because it makes no new claim. The others do - that interesting pieces are found nowhere else, that museums exist only for artefacts, or anything at all about visitor numbers, on which the statement is silent.

Answer: B

Correct answer: Only I

The advertisement opens by telling the reader not to worry, which presupposes that people do worry, and it offers a remedy as the cure for that worry - so the assumption behind the appeal is that the worry arises from having no remedy. Assumption II is about Indians trusting specialists in general, which the advertisement asserts of its own product rather than assumes, and III turns a stated duration into a criterion the advertisement never proposes.

Answer: B

The statement tells us that many great scientists are doing research on outer space. This could be on account of many reasons, prime among them being that the scientists find space a challenge. It could also be that it is one of the areas which has a lot of potential for research. Conclusion I is ruled out because of the word 'only'. Though, it is fair to say that space has mysteries and surprises, yet it would be erroneous to claim that it is the 'only' one to have them. Conclusion II tells us that outer space offers a challenge to scientists. As this is possible, hence only II follows.

Answer: D

Correct answer: if neither I nor II follows.

The statement recommends the train on one ground, the view. Conclusion I converts that into a claim about what people actually want on holiday, which is the advertiser’s hope rather than a fact established by the statement. Conclusion II turns a comparison into a prohibition; saying the train offers something the aeroplane cannot is a long way from saying nobody should fly.

Answer: D

The author assumes that the Indian Government should have taken care of its physical infrastructure. Radical change is for physical infrastructure but not global economy. So, I is not an assumption.

In the statement nothing is stated about the growth rate. Hence II is irrelevant.

Answer: C

The court has awarded punishment to the convicts. From this it can be concluded that they are found guilty.

Hence, choice (1) is conclusion.

The statement does not state on what grounds the court has awarded the punishment. It is not stated explicitly that the court has awarded the punishment because several people are killed.

Hence, choice (2) is an inference.

As the court found that putting to death is a suitable punishment for the crime committed by the convicts, the court is under the assumption that they are not fit to live in the society.

Hence, choice (3) is an implicit assumption.

The statement does not mention, whether some one instigated the convicts or they have done it on their own.

Hence, choice (4) is out of context.

Answer: A

Correct answer: Some beggars may not be poor.

The statement denies that all beggars are poor, which leaves open that some are and some are not - exactly what the keyed conclusion says. It does not tell us that every poor person is a beggar, which reverses the classes, nor does it license either conditional about a particular person A, since a denial of a universal supports no statement about any individual.

Answer: B

In the second part of the statement, the experts opinion is proved wrong. Hence, we can conclude that the experts judgement is not proper. Hence, II follows.

There is no information given about the celebrities who are not stressed. Hence I does not follow.

Answer: D

Correct answer: Both I and II follow

Conclusion I follows directly: only good dancers are invited, and good dancers have charming personalities, so every invitee has one. Conclusion II is the contrapositive of that same chain - anyone without a charming personality is not a good dancer, and so is not invited. A statement and its contrapositive are logically equivalent, so if the first follows the second must.