Statement: The company has prohibited the use of mobile phones during working hours. Conclusions: I. The company believes mobile phones distract employees from work. II. All employees own a mobile phone. Which conclusion(s) logically follow? MCQ with Answer and Explanation
Statement:
The company has prohibited the use of mobile phones during working hours.
Conclusions:
I. The company believes mobile phones distract employees from work.
II. All employees own a mobile phone.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
A. Neither I nor II follows
B. Only conclusion I follows
C. Only conclusion II follows
D. Both I and II follow
Answer: Option B
Solution (By JKExamLibrary)
A prohibition on an activity during working hours logically implies that the management considers it detrimental or distracting to work (I follows). The policy applies to those who have phones, but it doesn't mean *every single* employee owns one (II does not follow).
Statement: Since inequality is built in, wherever there is development there is little that can be done to arrest it except at the cost of development itself.
Conclusions:
I. To achieve development, inequality should be allowed to continue.
II. Equality and development do not go together.
Explanation:
Both conclusions follow from the statement. If arresting inequality comes at the cost of development, then to achieve development, inequality must be allowed (I). Also, it implies equality and development are not compatible (II).
Statements:
1. All squares are rectangles.
2. All rectangles are polygons.
Conclusions:
I. All squares are polygons.
II. Some polygons are squares.
Which conclusion(s) logically follow?
Explanation:
A -> B and B -> C means A -> C. Therefore, all squares are polygons (Conclusion I). Since all squares are polygons, it implies that at least some polygons (those specific squares) are squares (Conclusion II).
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!