Test: Logical Deductions - 2
10 Questions MCQ Test Logical Reasoning (LR) and Data Interpretation (DI) | Test: Logical Deductions - 2
| 1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? |
Direction: In the following question, two statements are given followed by three or four conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: All branches are flowers. All flowers are leaves.
Conclusions:
I. All branches are leaves.
II. All leaves are branches.
III. All flowers are branches.
IV. Some leaves are branches.
I. All branches are leaves.
II. All leaves are branches.
III. All flowers are branches.
IV. Some leaves are branches.
Since both the premises are universal and affirmative, the conclusion must be universal affirmative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'All branches are leaves'. Thus, I follows. IV is the converse of this conclusion and so it also holds.
Direction: In the following question, two statements are given followed by three or four conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: All aeroplanes are trains. Some trains are chairs.
Conclusions:
I. Some aeroplanes are chairs.
II. Some chairs are aeroplanes.
III. Some chairs are trains.
IV. Some trains are aeroplanes.
I. Some aeroplanes are chairs.
II. Some chairs are aeroplanes.
III. Some chairs are trains.
IV. Some trains are aeroplanes.
Since the middle term 'trains' is not distributed even once in the/premises, no definite conclusion follows. However, III is the converse of the second premise while IV is the converse of the first premise. So, both of them hold.
Direction: In the following question, two statements are given followed by three or four conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: All politicians are honest. All honest are fair.
Conclusions:
I. Some honest are politicians.
II. No honest is politician.
III. Some fair are politicians.
IV. All fair are politicians.
I. Some honest are politicians.
II. No honest is politician.
III. Some fair are politicians.
IV. All fair are politicians.
Clearly, it follows that 'All politicians are fair'. I is the converse of the first premise, while III is the converse of the above conclusion. So, both I and III hold.
Direction: In the following question, two statements are given followed by three or four conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: Some clothes are marbles. Some marbles are bags.
Conclusions:
I. No cloth is a bag.
II. All marbles are bags.
III. Some bags are clothes.
IV. No marble is a cloth.
Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion follows. However, I and III involve only the extreme terms and form a complementary pair. Thus, either I or III follows.
Direction: In the following question, two statements are given followed by three or four conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: Some tables are TVs. Some TVs are radios.
Conclusions:
I. Some tables are radios.
II. Some radios are tables.
III. All radios are TVs.
IV. All TVs are tables.
Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion follows.
Direction: In the following question, two statements are given followed by three or four conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: All terrorists are guilty. All terrorists are criminals.
Conclusions:
I. Either all criminals are guilty or all guilty are criminals.
II. Some guilty persons are criminals.
III. Generally criminals are guilty.
IV. Crime and guilt go together.
Since the middle term 'terrorists' is distributed twice in the premises, the conclusion cannot be universal. So, it follows that 'Some guilty persons are criminals'. Thus, II holds.
Direction: In the following question, two statements are given followed by three or four conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: Some books are pens. No pen is pencil.
Conclusions:
I. Some pens are books.
II. Some pencils are books.
III. Some books are not pencils.
IV. All pencils are books.
Since one premise is particular and the other negative, the conclusion must be particular negative and should not contain the middle term. Thus, III follows. I is the converse of the first premise and so it also holds.
Direction: In the following question, two statements are given followed by three or four conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: Some houses are offices. Some offices are schools.
Conclusions:
I. Some schools are houses.
II. Some offices are houses.
III. No house is school.
IV. Some schools are offices.
Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion follows. However, I and III involve only the extreme terms and form a complementary pair. So, either I or III follows. II is the converse of the first premise while IV is the converse of the second premise. Thus, both of them hold.
Direction: In the following question, three statements are given followed by four conclusions numbered I, II, III and TV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: All buildings are windows. No toys is building. Some tigers are toys.
Conclusions:
I. Some tigers are buildings.
II. Some windows are tigers.
III. All toys are tigers.
IV. Some windows are toys.
No toy is building. All buildings are windows.
Since the middle term 'buildings' is distributed twice and one premise is negative, the conclusion must be particular negative and should not contain the middle term.
So, it follows that 'Some windows are not toys'.
Some tigers are toys. No toy is building.
Since one premise is particular and the other premise is negative, the conclusion must be particular negative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some tigers are not buildings'.
Direction: In the following question, three statements are given followed by four conclusions numbered I, II, III and TV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: Some papers are cats. All cats are bats. No bat is horse.
Conclusions:
I. Some papers are horses.
II. No horse is cat.
III. Some bats are papers.
IV. All papers are bats.
Some papers are cats. All cats are bats.
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some papers are bats'. III is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds.
All cats are bats. No bat is horse.
Since both the premises are universal and one premise is negative, the conclusion must be universal negative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'No cat is horse'. II is the converse of this conclusion and so it holds.
Some papers are bats. No bat is horse.
Since one premise is particular and the other negative, the conclusion must be particular negative and should not contain the middle term. So, it follows that 'Some papers are not horses'.
|
96 videos|90 docs|119 tests
|
|
Use Code STAYHOME200 and get INR 200 additional OFF
|
Use Coupon Code |
|
96 videos|90 docs|119 tests
|
How to Prepare for CAT
Download free EduRev App
Related content with Test: Logical Deductions - 2
|
|
|
|
Related tests with Test: Logical Deductions - 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
Follow Us
|
