All Exams >
Bank Exams >
IBPS PO Prelims & Mains Preparation >
All Questions
All questions of Syllogisms for Bank Exams Exam
Two statements are given followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. Assuming the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.Statements:Some horses are not trucks.All horses are white.Conclusions:I. Some white are trucks.II. Some horses being truck is a possibility.- a)Only conclusion I follows
- b)Neither conclusion I nor II follows
- c)Only conclusion II follows
- d)Both conclusions I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Two statements are given followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. Assuming the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
Some horses are not trucks.
All horses are white.
Conclusions:
I. Some white are trucks.
II. Some horses being truck is a possibility.
a)
Only conclusion I follows
b)
Neither conclusion I nor II follows
c)
Only conclusion II follows
d)
Both conclusions I and II follow
|
Ragavi M answered |
Option C
all horses are white so
some white are trucks is not possible
all horses are white so
some white are trucks is not possible
| 1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App |
Statements: All the phones are scales. All the scales are calculators.Conclusions: - All the calculators are scales.
- All the phones are calculators
- All the scales are phones.
- Some calculators are phones.
- a)Only (1) and (4)
- b)Only (3) and (4)
- c)Only (2) and (4)
- d)Only (1) and (2)
- e)Only (1) and (3
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements: All the phones are scales. All the scales are calculators.
Conclusions:
- All the calculators are scales.
- All the phones are calculators
- All the scales are phones.
- Some calculators are phones.
a)
Only (1) and (4)
b)
Only (3) and (4)
c)
Only (2) and (4)
d)
Only (1) and (2)
e)
Only (1) and (3
|
Tarun Nambiar answered |
Statements: All the research scholars are psychologists. Some psychologists are scientists.
Conclusions:
- All the research scholars are scientists.
- Some research scholars are scientists.
- Some scientists are psychologists.
- Some psychologists are research scholars.
- a)Only (3) and (4)
- b)Only (3)
- c)Only (2) and (4)
- d)All the four
- e)None of the four
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements: All the research scholars are psychologists. Some psychologists are scientists.
Conclusions:
- All the research scholars are scientists.
- Some research scholars are scientists.
- Some scientists are psychologists.
- Some psychologists are research scholars.
a)
Only (3) and (4)
b)
Only (3)
c)
Only (2) and (4)
d)
All the four
e)
None of the four
|
Lavisha Tak answered |
Option D should be correct not option A
Statements: All men are vertebrates. Some mammals are vertebrates.Conclusions: - All men are mammals.
- All mammals are men.
- Some vertebrates are mammals.
- All vertebrates are men.
- a)Only (4)
- b)Only (2)
- c)Only (3)
- d)Only (1)
- e)Only (1) and (3)
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements: All men are vertebrates. Some mammals are vertebrates.
Conclusions:
- All men are mammals.
- All mammals are men.
- Some vertebrates are mammals.
- All vertebrates are men.
a)
Only (4)
b)
Only (2)
c)
Only (3)
d)
Only (1)
e)
Only (1) and (3)
|
|
Nitin Mehra answered |
Statements: All the books are pencils. No pencil is eraser.Conclusions: - All the pencils are books.
- Some erasers are books.
- No book is eraser.
- Some books are erasers.
- a)Only (3)
- b)Only (1) and (3)
- c)Only (1) and (2)
- d)Only (2) and (3)
- e)Only (3) and (4)
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements: All the books are pencils. No pencil is eraser.
Conclusions:
- All the pencils are books.
- Some erasers are books.
- No book is eraser.
- Some books are erasers.
a)
Only (3)
b)
Only (1) and (3)
c)
Only (1) and (2)
d)
Only (2) and (3)
e)
Only (3) and (4)
|
|
Sameer Yadav answered |
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.Statements:No plate is a spoon.Some plates are forks.All forks are knives.Conclusions:I. Some plates are knives is a possibility.II. No spoon is a fork.- a)Only conclusion I follows
- b)Neither conclusion I nor II follows
- c)Both conclusions I and II follow
- d)Only conclusion II follows
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
No plate is a spoon.
Some plates are forks.
All forks are knives.
Conclusions:
I. Some plates are knives is a possibility.
II. No spoon is a fork.
a)
Only conclusion I follows
b)
Neither conclusion I nor II follows
c)
Both conclusions I and II follow
d)
Only conclusion II follows
|
EduRev CLAT answered |
Statement:
No plate is a spoon.
Some plates are forks.
All forks are knives.
The least possible diagram for the given statements is as follows:
Conclusions:
(i) Some plates are knives is a possibility - False (Some plates are forks and All forks are knives, so some plates are knives is definitely true).
(ii) No spoon is a fork - False (Because No direct relation given between them, so It can be possible not definite).
Here, Neither conclusion I nor II follows.
Hence, the correct answer is "Option 2".
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.Statements:All tigers are lions.All lions are animals.Conclusions:Ⅰ. All tigers are animals.Ⅱ. No tigers is a bird. - a)Only conclusion II follows
- b)Both the conclusions follow
- c)Either conclusion I or II follows
- d)Only conclusion I follows
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
All tigers are lions.
All lions are animals.
Conclusions:
Ⅰ. All tigers are animals.
Ⅱ. No tigers is a bird.
a)
Only conclusion II follows
b)
Both the conclusions follow
c)
Either conclusion I or II follows
d)
Only conclusion I follows
|
|
EduRev CLAT answered |
The least possible Venn diagram is:
Conclusions:
Ⅰ. All tigers are animals. → Follows (As, All tigers are lions and All lions are animals)
Ⅱ. No tigers is a bird. → Do not follow (As, bird is not given in the statement, the relation between bird and tiger cannot be determined)
Hence, only conclusion I follows.
In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements.
Statements:
I. All Z are Y.
II. Some Y are B.
Conclusion:
I. Some B are not Z.
II. Some Y are not Z.
III. Some Z are Y.
- a)Only conclusion III follows
- b)Both conclusions I and III follows
- c)Both conclusions II and III follows
- d)All conclusion follows
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements.
Statements:
I. All Z are Y.
II. Some Y are B.
Conclusion:
I. Some B are not Z.
II. Some Y are not Z.
III. Some Z are Y.
a)
Only conclusion III follows
b)
Both conclusions I and III follows
c)
Both conclusions II and III follows
d)
All conclusion follows
|
Shivani das answered |
Given Statements:
I. All Z are Y.
II. Some Y are B.
Conclusions:
I. Some B are not Z.
II. Some Y are not Z.
III. Some Z are Y.
Explanation:
Conclusion I:
- From statement I, we know that all Z are Y.
- From statement II, we know that only some Y are B.
- Therefore, it is not possible to definitively conclude that some B are not Z based on the given statements. Conclusion I does not logically follow.
Conclusion II:
- From statement II, we know that some Y are B.
- Since all Z are Y, it is possible that some Y are Z as well.
- Therefore, it is not possible to definitively conclude that some Y are not Z based on the given statements. Conclusion II does not logically follow.
Conclusion III:
- From statement I, we know that all Z are Y.
- Therefore, it logically follows that some Z are Y based on the given statements. Conclusion III logically follows.
Conclusion:
Therefore, only conclusion III follows based on the given statements.
I. All Z are Y.
II. Some Y are B.
Conclusions:
I. Some B are not Z.
II. Some Y are not Z.
III. Some Z are Y.
Explanation:
Conclusion I:
- From statement I, we know that all Z are Y.
- From statement II, we know that only some Y are B.
- Therefore, it is not possible to definitively conclude that some B are not Z based on the given statements. Conclusion I does not logically follow.
Conclusion II:
- From statement II, we know that some Y are B.
- Since all Z are Y, it is possible that some Y are Z as well.
- Therefore, it is not possible to definitively conclude that some Y are not Z based on the given statements. Conclusion II does not logically follow.
Conclusion III:
- From statement I, we know that all Z are Y.
- Therefore, it logically follows that some Z are Y based on the given statements. Conclusion III logically follows.
Conclusion:
Therefore, only conclusion III follows based on the given statements.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.Statements :Some jims are nests.
Some nests are beams.
All beams are coaches.Conclusions :I. Some coaches are nests.
II. Some beams are jims.
III. No beam is a jim.
IV. Some nests are jims.- a)Only conclusions I and II follow
- b)Only conclusions II and III follow
- c)Both conclusions I and IV and either conclusion II or III follow
- d)Only conclusions II and IV follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements :
Some jims are nests.
Some nests are beams.
All beams are coaches.
Some nests are beams.
All beams are coaches.
Conclusions :
I. Some coaches are nests.
II. Some beams are jims.
III. No beam is a jim.
IV. Some nests are jims.
II. Some beams are jims.
III. No beam is a jim.
IV. Some nests are jims.
a)
Only conclusions I and II follow
b)
Only conclusions II and III follow
c)
Both conclusions I and IV and either conclusion II or III follow
d)
Only conclusions II and IV follow
|
|
Pallavi bhatia answered |
Understanding the Statements
The statements provided can be analyzed to determine the relationships between the categories mentioned:
- Some jims are nests.
- Some nests are beams.
- All beams are coaches.
Analyzing the Conclusions
Let’s evaluate each conclusion based on the statements:
Conclusion I: Some coaches are nests.
- Since all beams are coaches and some nests are beams, it follows that some nests must also be coaches. Hence, this conclusion is valid.
Conclusion II: Some beams are jims.
- The statement indicates that some jims are nests and some nests are beams. However, it does not confirm that any beams are jims, so this conclusion cannot be confidently stated as valid. Thus, this conclusion is not necessarily true.
Conclusion III: No beam is a jim.
- The statements do not provide enough information to conclude that no beams are jims. Since some jims are nests and some nests are beams, it is possible (but not guaranteed) that some jims could be beams. Therefore, this conclusion is not valid.
Conclusion IV: Some nests are jims.
- Given that some jims are nests, it logically follows that some nests must be jims. Thus, this conclusion is valid.
Final Assessment
Based on the evaluations:
- Valid Conclusions: I and IV
- Not Valid Conclusions: II and III
Thus, the correct answer is option 'C': Both conclusions I and IV and either conclusion II or III follow.
The statements provided can be analyzed to determine the relationships between the categories mentioned:
- Some jims are nests.
- Some nests are beams.
- All beams are coaches.
Analyzing the Conclusions
Let’s evaluate each conclusion based on the statements:
Conclusion I: Some coaches are nests.
- Since all beams are coaches and some nests are beams, it follows that some nests must also be coaches. Hence, this conclusion is valid.
Conclusion II: Some beams are jims.
- The statement indicates that some jims are nests and some nests are beams. However, it does not confirm that any beams are jims, so this conclusion cannot be confidently stated as valid. Thus, this conclusion is not necessarily true.
Conclusion III: No beam is a jim.
- The statements do not provide enough information to conclude that no beams are jims. Since some jims are nests and some nests are beams, it is possible (but not guaranteed) that some jims could be beams. Therefore, this conclusion is not valid.
Conclusion IV: Some nests are jims.
- Given that some jims are nests, it logically follows that some nests must be jims. Thus, this conclusion is valid.
Final Assessment
Based on the evaluations:
- Valid Conclusions: I and IV
- Not Valid Conclusions: II and III
Thus, the correct answer is option 'C': Both conclusions I and IV and either conclusion II or III follow.
In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements.Statements:I. No F is N.II. All N are L.Conclusions:I. All F are L.II. All N are F.III. Some L are N.- a)Only conclusion II follows
- b)Only conclusion III follows
- c)Only conclusion I follows
- d)All conclusion follows
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements.
Statements:
I. No F is N.
II. All N are L.
Conclusions:
I. All F are L.
II. All N are F.
III. Some L are N.
a)
Only conclusion II follows
b)
Only conclusion III follows
c)
Only conclusion I follows
d)
All conclusion follows
|
|
EduRev CLAT answered |
Given Statements:
I. No F is N.
II. All N are L.
The least possible Venn diagram for the given statement is:
Conclusions:
I. All F are L - False (Because, All N are L and no F is N, so those part of N that is L will be definitely not F).
II. All N are F - False (Because, No F is N).
III. Some L are N - True (Because, All N are L so, some L are N is definitely true).
So, Only conclusion III follows.
Hence, the correct answer is "Option 2".
Directions: Each question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. All software companies employ knowledge workers.
B. Tara Tech employs knowledge workers.
C. Tara Tech is a software company.
D. Some software companies employ knowledge workers.
E. Tara Tech employs only knowledge workers.- a)ABC
- b)ACB
- c)CDB
- d)ACE
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: Each question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.
A. All software companies employ knowledge workers.
B. Tara Tech employs knowledge workers.
C. Tara Tech is a software company.
D. Some software companies employ knowledge workers.
E. Tara Tech employs only knowledge workers.
B. Tara Tech employs knowledge workers.
C. Tara Tech is a software company.
D. Some software companies employ knowledge workers.
E. Tara Tech employs only knowledge workers.
a)
ABC
b)
ACB
c)
CDB
d)
ACE
|
Shireen Kapoor answered |
Understanding the Statements
To analyze why option 'B' (ACB) is correct, let's break down the statements:
- A: All software companies employ knowledge workers.
- B: Tara Tech employs knowledge workers.
- C: Tara Tech is a software company.
- D: Some software companies employ knowledge workers.
- E: Tara Tech employs only knowledge workers.
Logical Flow of Option B (ACB)
- Premise 1 (A): All software companies employ knowledge workers.
This establishes a general rule about software companies.
- Premise 2 (C): Tara Tech is a software company.
By asserting Tara Tech's identity as a software company, we can apply the general rule from statement A.
- Conclusion (B): Therefore, Tara Tech employs knowledge workers.
This conclusion logically follows from the premises: since Tara Tech is a software company (C), and all software companies employ knowledge workers (A), it must be true that Tara Tech employs knowledge workers (B).
Why Other Options Are Invalid
- Option A (ABC): This concludes that Tara Tech is a software company based on the premise that all software companies employ knowledge workers. This does not logically follow.
- Option C (CDB): The conclusion that some software companies employ knowledge workers is true but does not directly follow from Tara Tech being a software company.
- Option D (ACE): It states that Tara Tech employs only knowledge workers, which cannot be concluded from the given premises.
Conclusion
The correct option is B (ACB) because it follows a clear logical pathway from the premises to the conclusion, making it a valid argument.
To analyze why option 'B' (ACB) is correct, let's break down the statements:
- A: All software companies employ knowledge workers.
- B: Tara Tech employs knowledge workers.
- C: Tara Tech is a software company.
- D: Some software companies employ knowledge workers.
- E: Tara Tech employs only knowledge workers.
Logical Flow of Option B (ACB)
- Premise 1 (A): All software companies employ knowledge workers.
This establishes a general rule about software companies.
- Premise 2 (C): Tara Tech is a software company.
By asserting Tara Tech's identity as a software company, we can apply the general rule from statement A.
- Conclusion (B): Therefore, Tara Tech employs knowledge workers.
This conclusion logically follows from the premises: since Tara Tech is a software company (C), and all software companies employ knowledge workers (A), it must be true that Tara Tech employs knowledge workers (B).
Why Other Options Are Invalid
- Option A (ABC): This concludes that Tara Tech is a software company based on the premise that all software companies employ knowledge workers. This does not logically follow.
- Option C (CDB): The conclusion that some software companies employ knowledge workers is true but does not directly follow from Tara Tech being a software company.
- Option D (ACE): It states that Tara Tech employs only knowledge workers, which cannot be concluded from the given premises.
Conclusion
The correct option is B (ACB) because it follows a clear logical pathway from the premises to the conclusion, making it a valid argument.
Statements:
Some fruits are mangos.
All mangos are guavas.
No guava is a banana.
Conclusions:
I. All guavas are fruits.
II. Some guavas are fruits- a)If only conclusion I follows.
- b)If only conclusion II follows.
- c)If either conclusion I or conclusion II follows
- d)If both conclusions I and II follows.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements:
Some fruits are mangos.
All mangos are guavas.
No guava is a banana.
Conclusions:
I. All guavas are fruits.
II. Some guavas are fruits
Some fruits are mangos.
All mangos are guavas.
No guava is a banana.
Conclusions:
I. All guavas are fruits.
II. Some guavas are fruits
a)
If only conclusion I follows.
b)
If only conclusion II follows.
c)
If either conclusion I or conclusion II follows
d)
If both conclusions I and II follows.
|
|
Tarun Nambiar answered |
(i) All pages are markers --> Universal Affirmative (A - type).
(ii) Some fruits are apples --> Particular Affirmative (I - type)
(iii)No book is a page --> Universal Negative (E - type).
(iv) Some books are not pages --> Particular Negative (O - type).
Some fruits are mangos.
All mangos are guavas.
I + A => I - type of conclusion
"Some fruits are guavas".
Conclusion II is Converse of it.
All mangos are guavas
No guava is a banana.
A + E => E - type of conclusion
"No mango is a banana"
(ii) Some fruits are apples --> Particular Affirmative (I - type)
(iii)No book is a page --> Universal Negative (E - type).
(iv) Some books are not pages --> Particular Negative (O - type).
Some fruits are mangos.
All mangos are guavas.
I + A => I - type of conclusion
"Some fruits are guavas".
Conclusion II is Converse of it.
All mangos are guavas
No guava is a banana.
A + E => E - type of conclusion
"No mango is a banana"
Answer Option B
Three statements are given followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. Assuming the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.Statements:All birds are crows.Some crows are parrots.No crow is a pigeon.Conclusions:I. No parrot is a pigeon.II. Some birds are parrots.- a)Only conclusion I follows
- b)Only conclusion II follows
- c)Neither conclusion I nor II follows
- d)Both conclusions I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Three statements are given followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. Assuming the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
All birds are crows.
Some crows are parrots.
No crow is a pigeon.
Conclusions:
I. No parrot is a pigeon.
II. Some birds are parrots.
a)
Only conclusion I follows
b)
Only conclusion II follows
c)
Neither conclusion I nor II follows
d)
Both conclusions I and II follow
|
|
EduRev CLAT answered |
Given Statements:
All birds are crows.
Some crows are parrots.
No crow is a pigeon.
The least possible Venn diagram for the given statement is:
Conclusions:
I. No parrot is a pigeon - False (Because, No definite relation given between parrot and pigeon, so it can be possibly only).
II. Some birds are parrots - False (Because, No definite relation given between birds and parrots, so it can be possibly only).
So, Neither conclusion I nor II follows.
Hence, the correct answer is "Option 3".
Directions: Each question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.A. Traffic congestion increases carbon monoxide in the environment.
B. Increase in carbon monoxide is hazardous to health.
C. Traffic congestion is hazardous to health.
D. Some traffic congestion does not cause increased carbon monoxide.
E. Some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health.- a)CBA
- b)BDE
- c)CDE
- d)BAC
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: Each question consists of five statements followed by options consisting of three statements put together in a specific order. Choose the option which indicates a valid argument, that is, where the third statement is a conclusion drawn from the preceding two statements.
A. Traffic congestion increases carbon monoxide in the environment.
B. Increase in carbon monoxide is hazardous to health.
C. Traffic congestion is hazardous to health.
D. Some traffic congestion does not cause increased carbon monoxide.
E. Some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health.
B. Increase in carbon monoxide is hazardous to health.
C. Traffic congestion is hazardous to health.
D. Some traffic congestion does not cause increased carbon monoxide.
E. Some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health.
a)
CBA
b)
BDE
c)
CDE
d)
BAC
|
|
Anushka joshi answered |
Understanding the Argument Structure
To determine the valid argument from the given statements, we need to analyze how the statements link together logically.
Statements Breakdown
- A: Traffic congestion increases carbon monoxide in the environment.
- B: Increase in carbon monoxide is hazardous to health.
- C: Traffic congestion is hazardous to health.
- D: Some traffic congestion does not cause increased carbon monoxide.
- E: Some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health.
Identifying Valid Arguments
We need to find a set of three statements where the third statement logically follows from the first two.
Option D: BDE
- B: Increase in carbon monoxide is hazardous to health.
- D: Some traffic congestion does not cause increased carbon monoxide.
- E: Some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health.
Logical Flow
1. Premise 1 (B): It is established that an increase in carbon monoxide is harmful to health.
2. Premise 2 (D): Some traffic congestion does not result in increased carbon monoxide levels.
3. Conclusion (E): From these premises, we can conclude that some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health since it doesn’t contribute to increased carbon monoxide, which is what poses the health risk.
Why Other Options Fail
- Options A (CBA) and C (CDE) do not establish a logical connection between the statements.
- Option B (BDE) seems valid but does not lead to a direct conclusion regarding traffic congestion and health.
Conclusion
Thus, option D (BDE) provides a coherent argument structure where the conclusion logically stems from the premises.
To determine the valid argument from the given statements, we need to analyze how the statements link together logically.
Statements Breakdown
- A: Traffic congestion increases carbon monoxide in the environment.
- B: Increase in carbon monoxide is hazardous to health.
- C: Traffic congestion is hazardous to health.
- D: Some traffic congestion does not cause increased carbon monoxide.
- E: Some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health.
Identifying Valid Arguments
We need to find a set of three statements where the third statement logically follows from the first two.
Option D: BDE
- B: Increase in carbon monoxide is hazardous to health.
- D: Some traffic congestion does not cause increased carbon monoxide.
- E: Some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health.
Logical Flow
1. Premise 1 (B): It is established that an increase in carbon monoxide is harmful to health.
2. Premise 2 (D): Some traffic congestion does not result in increased carbon monoxide levels.
3. Conclusion (E): From these premises, we can conclude that some traffic congestion is not hazardous to health since it doesn’t contribute to increased carbon monoxide, which is what poses the health risk.
Why Other Options Fail
- Options A (CBA) and C (CDE) do not establish a logical connection between the statements.
- Option B (BDE) seems valid but does not lead to a direct conclusion regarding traffic congestion and health.
Conclusion
Thus, option D (BDE) provides a coherent argument structure where the conclusion logically stems from the premises.
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.Statements: I. Some X are M.II. All W are X.Conclusions:I. Some M are not W.II. No W is M.III. Some M are not X.- a)None of the conclusions follow
- b)Only conclusion III follows
- c)Only conclusions II and III follow
- d)All the conclusions follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
I. Some X are M.
II. All W are X.
Conclusions:
I. Some M are not W.
II. No W is M.
III. Some M are not X.
a)
None of the conclusions follow
b)
Only conclusion III follows
c)
Only conclusions II and III follow
d)
All the conclusions follow
|
Alok Mehra answered |
Understanding the Statements
The statements provided are:
- I. Some X are M.
- II. All W are X.
From these statements, we can analyze the relationships between the groups X, M, and W.
Analyzing the Conclusions
1. Conclusion I: Some M are not W.
- Based on statement II, all W are included in X. However, since only some X are M, it is not guaranteed that any M is W. Thus, it is possible that some M are indeed not W, but we cannot definitively conclude it from the given statements.
2. Conclusion II: No W is M.
- This conclusion suggests that there is no overlap between W and M. However, since some X are M and all W are X, it is possible for some W to also be M. Therefore, we cannot conclude that no W is M.
3. Conclusion III: Some M are not X.
- Since some X are M, it is not possible to conclude that some M are not X. In fact, all M could potentially be included in X. Thus, this conclusion does not logically follow.
Final Evaluation of Conclusions
- All conclusions I, II, and III do not logically follow from the statements provided. Hence, the correct option is:
Answer: a) None of the conclusions follow
This analysis illustrates that although some conclusions may seem plausible, they do not necessarily follow from the relationships defined in the statements.
The statements provided are:
- I. Some X are M.
- II. All W are X.
From these statements, we can analyze the relationships between the groups X, M, and W.
Analyzing the Conclusions
1. Conclusion I: Some M are not W.
- Based on statement II, all W are included in X. However, since only some X are M, it is not guaranteed that any M is W. Thus, it is possible that some M are indeed not W, but we cannot definitively conclude it from the given statements.
2. Conclusion II: No W is M.
- This conclusion suggests that there is no overlap between W and M. However, since some X are M and all W are X, it is possible for some W to also be M. Therefore, we cannot conclude that no W is M.
3. Conclusion III: Some M are not X.
- Since some X are M, it is not possible to conclude that some M are not X. In fact, all M could potentially be included in X. Thus, this conclusion does not logically follow.
Final Evaluation of Conclusions
- All conclusions I, II, and III do not logically follow from the statements provided. Hence, the correct option is:
Answer: a) None of the conclusions follow
This analysis illustrates that although some conclusions may seem plausible, they do not necessarily follow from the relationships defined in the statements.
Statements: All the goats are tigers. All the tigers are lions.Conclusions: - All the goats are lions.
- All the lions are goats.
- Some lions are goats.
- Some tigers are goats.
- a)Only (1), (2) and (3)
- b)Only (1), (3) and (4)
- c)Only (2), (3) and (4)
- d)All the four
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements: All the goats are tigers. All the tigers are lions.
Conclusions:
- All the goats are lions.
- All the lions are goats.
- Some lions are goats.
- Some tigers are goats.
a)
Only (1), (2) and (3)
b)
Only (1), (3) and (4)
c)
Only (2), (3) and (4)
d)
All the four
|
|
Tarun Nambiar answered |
Statements: All green are blue. All blue are white.Conclusions: - Some blue are green.
- Some white are green.
- Some green are not white.
- All white are blue.
- a)Only (1) and (2)
- b)Only (1) and (3)
- c)Only (1) and (4)
- d)Only (2) and (4)
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements: All green are blue. All blue are white.
Conclusions:
- Some blue are green.
- Some white are green.
- Some green are not white.
- All white are blue.
a)
Only (1) and (2)
b)
Only (1) and (3)
c)
Only (1) and (4)
d)
Only (2) and (4)
|
|
Parth Joshi answered |
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.Statements:Some jugs are bottles.
No bottle is a candy.
All spoons are bottles.Conclusions:I. Some jugs are spoons.
Il. No spoon is a candy.
Ill. No jug is a spoon.
IV. No jug is a candy.- a)Either Conclusion I or Ill and II follow.
- b)Only Conclusions Il and III follow.
- c)Only Conclusions I, Il and IV follow.
- d)Either Conclusion I or IV and II follow.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:
Some jugs are bottles.
No bottle is a candy.
All spoons are bottles.
No bottle is a candy.
All spoons are bottles.
Conclusions:
I. Some jugs are spoons.
Il. No spoon is a candy.
Ill. No jug is a spoon.
IV. No jug is a candy.
Il. No spoon is a candy.
Ill. No jug is a spoon.
IV. No jug is a candy.
a)
Either Conclusion I or Ill and II follow.
b)
Only Conclusions Il and III follow.
c)
Only Conclusions I, Il and IV follow.
d)
Either Conclusion I or IV and II follow.
|
Muskaan dasgupta answered |
Statements:
- Some jugs are bottles.
- No bottle is a candy.
- All spoons are bottles.
Conclusions:
I. Some jugs are spoons.
II. No spoon is a candy.
III. No jug is a spoon.
IV. No jug is a candy.
Explanation:
- From the given statements, we know that some jugs are bottles and all spoons are bottles. Therefore, some jugs are spoons (Conclusion I) as there is an overlap between jugs and spoons through the common category of bottles.
- It is given that no bottle is a candy, and since all spoons are bottles, it follows that no spoon is a candy (Conclusion II).
- Since all spoons are bottles and some jugs are bottles, there is a possibility that some jugs are spoons. Therefore, it is not necessarily true that no jug is a spoon (Conclusion III does not necessarily follow).
- There is no direct relationship established between jugs and candies in the given statements, so it cannot be definitively concluded that no jug is a candy (Conclusion IV does not necessarily follow).
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'a) Either Conclusion I or III and II follow.'
- Some jugs are bottles.
- No bottle is a candy.
- All spoons are bottles.
Conclusions:
I. Some jugs are spoons.
II. No spoon is a candy.
III. No jug is a spoon.
IV. No jug is a candy.
Explanation:
- From the given statements, we know that some jugs are bottles and all spoons are bottles. Therefore, some jugs are spoons (Conclusion I) as there is an overlap between jugs and spoons through the common category of bottles.
- It is given that no bottle is a candy, and since all spoons are bottles, it follows that no spoon is a candy (Conclusion II).
- Since all spoons are bottles and some jugs are bottles, there is a possibility that some jugs are spoons. Therefore, it is not necessarily true that no jug is a spoon (Conclusion III does not necessarily follow).
- There is no direct relationship established between jugs and candies in the given statements, so it cannot be definitively concluded that no jug is a candy (Conclusion IV does not necessarily follow).
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'a) Either Conclusion I or III and II follow.'
Statements: Some pens are books. Some books are pencils.Conclusions: - Some pens are pencils.
- Some pencils are pens.
- All pencils are pens.
- All books are pens.
- a)Only (1) and (3)
- b)Only (2) and (4)
- c)Only (1)
- d)All the four
- e)None of the four
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements: Some pens are books. Some books are pencils.
Conclusions:
- Some pens are pencils.
- Some pencils are pens.
- All pencils are pens.
- All books are pens.
a)
Only (1) and (3)
b)
Only (2) and (4)
c)
Only (1)
d)
All the four
e)
None of the four
|
|
Shivam Menon answered |
In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements.Statements:I. All B are V.II. All K are B.Conclusion:I. All K are V.II. No V is B.- a)Both conclusions I and II follows
- b)Neither conclusion follows
- c)Only conclusion I follows
- d)Only conclusion II follows
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions based on those statements. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements.
Statements:
I. All B are V.
II. All K are B.
Conclusion:
I. All K are V.
II. No V is B.
a)
Both conclusions I and II follows
b)
Neither conclusion follows
c)
Only conclusion I follows
d)
Only conclusion II follows
|
|
EduRev CLAT answered |
Given Statements:
I. All B are V.
II. All K are B.
The least possible Venn diagram for the given statement is:
Conclusions:
I. All K are V - True (Because, All K are B and All B are V gives All K are V).
II. No V is B - False (Because, All B are V).
So, Only conclusion I follows.
Hence, the correct answer is "Option 3".
Chapter doubts & questions for Syllogisms - IBPS PO Prelims & Mains Preparation 2024 is part of Bank Exams exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the Bank Exams exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for Bank Exams 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of Syllogisms - IBPS PO Prelims & Mains Preparation in English & Hindi are available as part of Bank Exams exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Bank Exams Exam by signing up for free.
IBPS PO Prelims & Mains Preparation
544 videos|686 docs|263 tests
|
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Study with 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos & Tests
10M+ students study on EduRev
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
Follow Us
|
Signup to see your scores
go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup