Logical Deduction - Section 1 (5)
- Home
- Logical Reasoning
- Logical Deduction
- Logical Deduction - Section 1
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 known 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 I or II follows
- (D) If neither I nor II follows and
- (E) If both I and II follow.
| 33. | Statements: Some dreams are nights. Some nights are days. Conclusions: 1.All days are either nights or dreams. 2.Some days are nights. |
|||||||||
Answer: Option B Explanation: Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion follows. However, II is the converse of the second premise and thus it holds. |
| 34. | Statements: All hill stations have a sun-set point. X is a hill station. Conclusions: 1.X has a sun-set point. 2.Places other than hill stations do not have sun-set points. |
|||||||||
Answer: Option A Explanation: Since both the premises are universal and affirmative, the conclusion must be universal affirmative and should not contain the middle term. So, only I follows. |
| 35. |
|
|||||||||
Answer: Option 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. II is the converse of the second premise and so it also holds. |
| 36. | Statements: All good athletes win. All good athletes eat well. Conclusions: 1.All those who eat well are good athletes. 2.All those who win eat well. |
|||||||||
Answer: Option 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'. |
| 37. | Statements: All fishes are grey in colour. Some fishes are heavy. Conclusions: 1.All heavy fishes are grey in colour. 2.All light fishes are not grey in colour. |
|||||||||
Answer: Option A Explanation: Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some heavy things are grey in colour'. I is a cumulative result of this conclusion and the first premise. Thus, only I holds. |
| 38. | Statements: Some swords are sharp. All swords are rusty Conclusions: 1.Some rusty things are sharp. 2.Some rusty things are not sharp. |
|||||||||
Answer: Option A Explanation: Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term. So, I follows. Since both the premises are affirmative, the conclusion cannot be negative. Thus, II does not follow. |
| 39. |
|
|||||||||
Answer: Option D Explanation: The first premise is an E-type proposition, So, the middle term 'gentleman' forming the subject is distributed. The second premise is an A-type proposition. So, the middle term 'gentlemen' forming the subject is distributed. Since the middle term is distributed twice, the conclusion cannot be universal. Since one premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative. Thus, it follows that 'Some rich men are not poor'. Thus, neither I nor II follows. |
| 40. | Statements: Some dedicated souls are angels. All social workers are angels. Conclusions: 1.Some dedicated souls are social workers. 2.Some social workers are dedicated souls. |
|||||||||
Answer: Option D Explanation: The first premise is an I type proposition. So, the middle term 'angels' forming the predicate is not distributed. The second premise is an A type proposition. So, the middle term 'angels' forming the predicate is not distributed. Since the middle term is not distributed even once in the premises, no definite conclusion follows. |