Logical Reasoning Quiz 2017 – Set 1 – Syllogisms | Statements & Arguements

Directions (Q. 1-5): In making decisions about important questions,
it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak”
arguments insofar as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which
are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are
those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the
question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question
below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a “strong”
argument and which is a “weak” argument.

Give answer

1) if only argument I is “strong”.

2) if only argument II is “strong”.

3) if either I or II is “strong”.

4) if neither I nor II is “strong”.

5) if both I and II are “strong”.

1. Statement: Should
India open up job market to Americans or other foreigners?

Arguments:

I. Yes; they are
more dexterous than the Indians.

II. No; it will
have a cascading effect on the Indian economy because of the increase in
unemployment.

2. Statement: Should
a private power supply company be allowed to supply power in high-security
zones?

Arguments:

I. Yes; a private
power company supplies power reliably to highly sensitive areas.

II. No; allowing
a private power company can risk security in VIP residences and offices.

3. Statement: Should
Corporate India be made to foot the higher education bill?

Arguments:

I. Yes; the
government provides huge subsidy on higher education. If Corporate India comes
forward, the burden on exchequer can be reduced.

II. No; this will
give an excuse to the government to get rid of social obligations.

4. Statement: Should
all roads be handed over to one civic agency in each city?

Arguments:

I. Yes; the move
will be helpful in better upkeep because a single civic agency can carry the
responsibility more appropriately with strong determination and dedication.

II. No; it will
result in poor condition of roads because of the monopoly and the lack of
competitive environment.

5. Statement: Should
India let its relations with Israel be influenced by its ties with the Arab
nations?

Arguments:

I. Yes; Israel is
the illegal occupier of Palestinian land against the will of the United Nations
whereas India and Arab nations are firm supporters of the Palestinian state.

II. No; we have
vested interest with both Israel and the Arab nations; the former plays an
important role in our defence deal and the latter in energy deal.

Directions (Q. 6-10): In each question below are given three
statements followed by 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 with commonly known
facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions
logically follows from the given statements, disregarding commonly known facts.

6. Statements: a.
All flowers are chickens.

b. No ducks are chickens.

c. Some ducks are deer.

Conclusions: I.
No flowers are ducks.

II. Some flowers
are ducks.

III. Some deer
are not flowers.

IV. Some deer are
flowers.

1) Only I and III follow

2) Only I and either III or IV follow

3) Only III and either I or II follow

4) Only either I or II and either III or IV follow

5) None of these

7. Statements: a.
No cousins are sisters.

b. Only sisters are mothers.

c. No fathers are mothers.

Conclusions: I.
Some mothers are not fathers.

II. No mothers
are cousins.

III. No sisters
are fathers.

IV. No cousins
are fathers.

1) Only I and IV follow 2) Only I, III and IV follow

3) Only I and II follow 4) Only II, III and IV follow

5) None of these

8. Statements: a.
Some books are cups.

b. Some pens are books.

c. All cups are plates.

Conclusions: I.
Some cups are books.

II. Some cups are
not books.

III. Some pens
are cups.

IV. Some plates
are books.

1) Only either I or II and III follow

2) Only II and either III or IV follow

3) Only I and III follow

4) Only II and III follow

5) None of these

9. Statements: a.
No books are pens.

b. No pens are pencils.

c. No pencils are erasers.

Conclusions: I.
Some books are pencils.

II. Some erasers
are pens.

III. Some erasers
are not pens.

IV. No books are
erasers.

1) Only I follows

2) Only either II or III follows

3 Only either I or IV follows

4) Only III follows

5) None of these

10. Statements: a.
All boys are children.

b. All girls are children.

c. All girls are women.

Conclusions: I.
Some women are children.

II. Some boys are
children.

III. Some
children are boys.

IV. Some girls
are children.

1) Only I and II follow

2) Only I, II and IV follow

3) Only I and either II or III follow

4) All follow

5) None of these

1. 2; Argument I is not true.
Therefore, it is not strong. But argument II is strong because opening up of
the job market will aggravate the problem of unemployment.

2. 1; People desire reliable
power supply. And for security zones the ‘reliability’ becomes essential when
the security of the area is considered. Hence, argument I is strong. Argument
II is not strong because it does not go into reason.

3. 1; Huge subsidy on higher
education is a burden on the exchequer. Reducing the subsidy is desirable.
Hence, argument I is strong. Argument II is not necessarily true. Hence, it is
a weak argument.

4. 2; I is weak because
‘determination and dedication” has nothing to do with the fact that there is
one civic agency or more in the city. These characteristics can be shown even
if there are several agencies. II is strong because lack of competition is not
desirable.

5. 2; Argument I is not strong
because it is difficult to ascertain illegality in today’s geopolitics.
Argument II is strong because of the role of Israel in India’s defence.

6. 1; Statement (a) + conversion
of (b) gives conclusion I [Because, A + E = E]. Hence, conclusion I follows but
conclusion II does not follow. Again, conclusion I + statement (c) gives
conclusion III [Because, E + I = O*]. Hence, conclusion III follows but
conclusion IV does not follow.

7. 3; Conclusion I is an
implication of the converted form of statement (c). Hence, conclusion I
follows. Again, “Only sisters are mothers” Þ
“All mothers are sisters”. Now, “All mothers are sisters” + conversion of
statement (a) gives conclusion II [Because,  A + E = E]. Again, statement (c) + “All
mothers are sisters” gives the conclusion “Some sisters are not fathers” [Because,
 E + A = O*]. Hence, conclusion III does
not follow. Now, statement (a) + “Some sisters are not fathers” gives no
conclusion [Because,  E + O = No
conclusion]. Hence, conclusion IV does not follow.

8. 5; Only I and IV follow.
Conclusion I follows from conversion of statement (a), whereas conclusion II
does not follow. Again, statement (b) + statement (a) gives no conclusion [Because,
I + I = No conclusion]. Hence, conclusion III does not follow. Again, statement
(a) + statement (c) gives conclusion “Some books are plates” ® on conversion ® ”Some plates are books”.
Hence, conclusion IV follows.

9. 2; We know that E + E = No
conclusion. Here all the statements are of type E. Hence, a conclusion can be
obtained only through conversion or implication. But the given conclusions
can’t be inferred. Hence, no conclusion follows. But the conclusions II and III
make a complementary pair (I-O type). Hence, either conclusion II or conclusion
III follows.

10. 4; Conversion of statement
(b) + Statement (c) gives the conclusion “Some children are women” [Because,  I + A = I] ®
on conversion ®
“Some women are children”. Hence, conclusion I follows. Conclusion II follows
as an implication of statement (a). Conclusion III follows from conversion of
statement (a). Again, conclusion IV follows as an implication of statement (b).
Hence, all conclusions follow