Q 38. Syllogism
Two Statements followed by four Conclusions are given below. You have to take the Statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read all the Conclusions and then decide which of the given Conclusions logically follows/follow from the Statements, disregarding the commonly known facts:
Statement-1: All pens are books.
Statement-2: No chair is a pen.
Conclusion-I: All chairs are books.
Conclusion-II: Some chairs are pens.
Conclusion-III: All books are chairs.
Conclusion-IV: No chair is a book.
Which one of the following is correct?
Let's analyze the given statements and conclusions step by step:
● Statement-1: All pens are books.
○ This means every pen is included in the category of books.
● Statement-2: No chair is a pen.
○ This means there is no overlap between the category of chairs and the category of pens.
Now, let's evaluate each conclusion:
● Conclusion-I: All chairs are books.
○ This conclusion does not logically follow from the given statements. While all pens are books, there is no information provided about the relationship between chairs and books. Therefore, we cannot conclude that all chairs are books.
● Conclusion-II: Some chairs are pens.
○ This conclusion directly contradicts Statement-2, which states that no chair is a pen. Therefore, this conclusion does not follow.
● Conclusion-III: All books are chairs.
○ This conclusion does not logically follow from the given statements. There is no information provided that suggests all books are chairs. In fact, Statement-1 suggests that all pens are books, but it does not imply that all books are chairs.
● Conclusion-IV: No chair is a book.
○ This conclusion does not logically follow from the given statements. While Statement-2 states that no chair is a pen, it does not provide any information about the relationship between chairs and books. Therefore, we cannot conclude that no chair is a book.
Since none of the conclusions logically follow from the given statements, the correct answer is Option D: None of the Conclusions follows.
Q 39. Syllogism
Three Statements followed by three Conclusions are given below. You have to take the Statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read all the Conclusions and then decide which of the given Conclusions logically follows/follow from the Statements, disregarding the commonly known facts:
Statement-1: Some doctors are teachers.
Statement-2: All teachers are engineers.
Statement-3: All engineers are scientists.
Conclusion-I: Some scientists are doctors.
Conclusion-II: All engineers are doctors.
Conclusion-III: Some engineers are doctors.
Which one of the following is correct?
Let's analyze the given statements and conclusions step by step:
Statements:
● Statement-1: Some doctors are teachers.
● Statement-2: All teachers are engineers.
● Statement-3: All engineers are scientists.
Conclusions:
● Conclusion-I: Some scientists are doctors.
● Conclusion-II: All engineers are doctors.
● Conclusion-III: Some engineers are doctors.
Analysis:
○ From Statement-1 and Statement-2, we know that some doctors are teachers and all teachers are engineers. Therefore, some doctors are engineers. This directly supports Conclusion-III: Some engineers are doctors.
○ From Statement-2 and Statement-3, we know that all teachers are engineers and all engineers are scientists. Therefore, all teachers are scientists. Since some doctors are teachers (from Statement-1), it follows that some doctors are scientists. This supports Conclusion-I: Some scientists are doctors.
● Conclusion-II: All engineers are doctors is not supported by the statements. The statements only indicate that some doctors are engineers, not that all engineers are doctors.
Therefore, the conclusions that logically follow from the given statements are Conclusion-I and Conclusion-III. Hence, the correct answer is Option C: Both Conclusion-I and Conclusion-III.
Q 10. Syllogism
A Statement followed by Conclusion-I and Conclusion-II is given below. You have to take the Statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read all Conclusions and then decide which of the given Conclusion(s) logically follows/follow from the Statement, disregarding the commonly known facts.
Statement: Some radios are mobiles. All mobiles are computers. Some computers are watches.
Conclusion-I: Certainly some radios are watches.
Conclusion-II: Certainly some mobiles are watches.
Which one of the following is correct?
Let's analyze the given statement and conclusions step by step:
Statement:
1. Some radios are mobiles.
2. All mobiles are computers.
3. Some computers are watches.
Conclusion-I: Certainly some radios are watches.
○ To evaluate Conclusion-I, we need to determine if there is a definite relationship between radios and watches based on the given statements.
○ From the statements, we know:
○ Some radios are mobiles (Statement 1).
○ All mobiles are computers (Statement 2), which implies that some radios are also computers.
○ Some computers are watches (Statement 3).
○ However, there is no direct or definite link that ensures some radios are watches. The overlap between computers and watches does not guarantee that the radios, which are a subset of computers, are also watches. Therefore, Conclusion-I does not logically follow.
Conclusion-II: Certainly some mobiles are watches.
○ To evaluate Conclusion-II, we need to determine if there is a definite relationship between mobiles and watches.
○ From the statements, we know:
○ All mobiles are computers (Statement 2).
○ Some computers are watches (Statement 3).
○ However, the fact that some computers are watches does not guarantee that the mobiles, which are a subset of computers, are also watches. There is no certainty that the part of computers that overlaps with watches includes mobiles. Therefore, Conclusion-II does not logically follow.
Since neither Conclusion-I nor Conclusion-II logically follows from the given statements, the correct answer is Option D: Neither Conclusion-I nor Conclusion-II.
Q 15. Syllogism
A Statement followed by Conclusion-I and Conclusion-II is given below. You have to take the Statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read all Conclusions and then decide which of the given Conclusion(s) logically follows/follows from the Statement, disregarding the commonly known facts.
Statement: Some cats are almirahs. Some almirahs are chairs. All chairs are tables.
Conclusion-I: Certainly some almirahs are tables.
Conclusion-II: Some cats may not be chairs.
Which one of the following is correct?
● Statement Analysis:
1. Some cats are almirahs.
2. Some almirahs are chairs.
3. All chairs are tables.
● Conclusion-I: Certainly some almirahs are tables.
○ From the statements, we know that "All chairs are tables" and "Some almirahs are chairs." Therefore, the almirahs that are chairs are certainly tables. Hence, Conclusion-I logically follows.
● Conclusion-II: Some cats may not be chairs.
○ From the statements, we know that "Some cats are almirahs" and "Some almirahs are chairs." However, there is no direct statement linking cats to chairs. Therefore, it is possible that some cats are not chairs. Hence, Conclusion-II logically follows.
○ Since both conclusions logically follow from the given statements, the correct answer is Option C: Both Conclusion-I and Conclusion-II.
Q 49. Syllogism
Consider two Statements and four Conclusions given below. You have to take the Statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read all Conclusions and then decide which of the given Conclusion(s) logically follows/follow from the Statements, disregarding the commonly known facts.
Statement-1: Some greens are blues.
Statement-2: Some blues are blacks.
Conclusion-1: Some greens are blacks.
Conclusion-2: No green is black.
Conclusion-3: All greens are blacks.
Conclusion-4: All blacks are greens.
Which one of the following is correct?
To solve this problem, we need to analyze the given statements and determine which conclusions logically follow from them.
Statements:
● Statement-1: Some greens are blues.
● Statement-2: Some blues are blacks.
Conclusions:
● Conclusion-1: Some greens are blacks.
● Conclusion-2: No green is black.
● Conclusion-3: All greens are blacks.
● Conclusion-4: All blacks are greens.
Analysis:
○ From Statement-1, we know there is an overlap between greens and blues, but we do not know the extent of this overlap.
○ From Statement-2, we know there is an overlap between blues and blacks, but again, the extent of this overlap is unknown.
Now, let's evaluate each conclusion:
● Conclusion-1: Some greens are blacks.
○ This conclusion assumes a direct overlap between greens and blacks, which is not necessarily true based on the given statements. The overlap could be only between greens and blues, and separately between blues and blacks, without any direct overlap between greens and blacks.
● Conclusion-2: No green is black.
○ This conclusion is also not necessarily true. The statements do not provide enough information to definitively say that no green is black. There could be a possibility of overlap, but it is not guaranteed.
● Conclusion-3: All greens are blacks.
○ This conclusion is too strong and cannot be derived from the given statements. The statements only indicate partial overlaps, not complete ones.
● Conclusion-4: All blacks are greens.
○ Similar to Conclusion-3, this conclusion is too strong. The statements do not provide any information to support that all blacks are greens.
Since none of the conclusions can be definitively drawn from the given statements, the correct answer is Option D: Neither Conclusion 1 nor 2 nor 3 nor 4.
Q 32. Syllogism
Two Statements are given followed by two Conclusions:
Statements:
1. All numbers are divisible by 2.
2. All numbers are divisible by 3.
Conclusions:
I. All numbers are divisible by 6.
II. All numbers are divisible by 4.
Which of the above Conclusions logically follows/follow from the two given Statements?
• All numbers which are divisible by 2 and 3 must also be divisible by 6. So, conclusion-I is true.
• All numbers which are divisible by 2 and 3 need not be divisible by 4.
Q 33. Syllogism
Two Statements are given followed by two Conclusion:
Statements:
All cats are dogs.
All cats are black.
Conclusions-I All dogs are black.
Conclusions-II Some dogs are not black.
Which of the above Conclusions logically follows/follow from the two given Statements, disregarding commonly known facts?
Let's analyze the given statements and conclusions step by step:
Statements:
1. All cats are dogs.
2. All cats are black.
Conclusions:
● Conclusion-I: All dogs are black.
● Conclusion-II: Some dogs are not black.
Analysis:
○ From Statement 1, we know that all cats are a subset of dogs. This means every cat is a dog, but not necessarily every dog is a cat.
○ From Statement 2, we know that all cats are black. This means every cat is black, but it does not imply anything about dogs that are not cats.
Conclusion-I: "All dogs are black."
○ This conclusion assumes that because all cats (which are dogs) are black, all dogs must be black. However, the statements do not provide information about dogs that are not cats. Therefore, this conclusion does not logically follow from the given statements.
Conclusion-II: "Some dogs are not black."
○ This conclusion suggests that there are dogs that are not black. However, the statements do not provide any information about dogs that are not cats, so we cannot make this conclusion based on the given information.
Since neither conclusion logically follows from the given statements, the correct answer is Option C: Neither Conclusion-I nor Conclusion-II.
Q 13. Syllogism
Consider the following Statements and Conclusions:
Statements:
1. Some rats are cats.
2. Some cats are dogs.
3. No dog is a cow
Conclusions:
I. No cow is a cat.
II. No dog is a rat.
III. Some cats are rats.
Which of the above conclusions is/are drawn from the statements?
• The conclusion of 'Some rats are cats' is 'Some cats are rats'.
• Two possible cases:
• Only statement 3 is correct.
Q 20. Syllogism
All good athletes want to win and all athletes who want to win eat a well-balanced diet; therefore all athletes who do not eat a well-balanced diet are bad athletes. The best conclusion from this statement is that
● Statement 1: All good athletes want to win.
○ This implies that if someone is a good athlete, they have the desire to win.
● Statement 2: All athletes who want to win eat a well-balanced diet.
○ This implies that if an athlete wants to win, they must eat a well-balanced diet.
● Statement 3: Therefore, all athletes who do not eat a well-balanced diet are bad athletes.
○ This conclusion is derived from the combination of the first two statements. If an athlete does not eat a well-balanced diet, they cannot want to win (from Statement 2), and thus cannot be a good athlete (from Statement 1).
● Option Analysis:
● Option A: No bad athlete wants to win.
○ This is not necessarily true based on the given statements. The statements do not provide information about the desires of bad athletes.
● Option B: No athlete who does not eat a well-balanced diet is a good athlete.
○ This is directly supported by Statement 3, which concludes that athletes who do not eat a well-balanced diet are bad athletes, and thus cannot be good athletes.
● Option C: Every athlete who eats a well-balanced diet is a good athlete.
○ This is not supported by the statements. Eating a well-balanced diet is a condition for wanting to win, but it does not guarantee that the athlete is good.
● Option D: All athletes who want to win are good athletes.
○ This is not necessarily true. The statements only indicate that good athletes want to win, not that all who want to win are good athletes.
● Conclusion: The best conclusion from the given statements is Option B, as it logically follows from the premises provided.
Q 55. Syllogism
Consider the following statements followed by two conclusions:
Statements:
Some men are great.
Some men are wise.
Conclusion I: Men are either great or wise.
Conclusion II: Some men are neither great nor wise.
Which one of the following is correct?
● Statements:
1. Some men are great.
2. Some men are wise.
● Conclusion I: Men are either great or wise.
○ This conclusion suggests that all men fall into one of two categories: great or wise. However, the statements only indicate that some men are great and some men are wise. There is no information provided that all men must be either great or wise. Therefore, this conclusion is not valid.
● Conclusion II: Some men are neither great nor wise.
○ This conclusion suggests that there exists a group of men who are neither great nor wise. The statements do not provide enough information to support this conclusion. The statements only mention that some men are great and some are wise, but they do not specify anything about men who are neither. Therefore, this conclusion is also not valid.
○ Since neither conclusion can be definitively drawn from the given statements, the correct answer is Option D: Neither of the conclusions is valid.
Q 16. Syllogism
Consider the following statements:
1. All artists are whimsical.
2. Some artists are drug addicts.
3. Frustrated people are prone to become drug addicts.
From the above three statements it may be concluded that:
● Statement 1: All artists are whimsical.
○ This implies that every artist falls under the category of whimsical people.
● Statement 2: Some artists are drug addicts.
○ This indicates that there is an overlap between the group of artists and the group of drug addicts. However, it does not specify how many or which artists are drug addicts.
● Statement 3: Frustrated people are prone to become drug addicts.
○ This suggests a tendency for frustrated people to become drug addicts, but it does not imply that all drug addicts are frustrated or that all frustrated people become drug addicts.
Analysis of Options:
● Option A: Artists are frustrated.
○ There is no direct information linking artists to being frustrated. The statements do not provide any evidence to support this conclusion.
● Option B: Some drug addicts are whimsical.
○ Since all artists are whimsical (Statement 1) and some artists are drug addicts (Statement 2), it logically follows that some drug addicts are whimsical. This is a valid conclusion based on the given statements.
● Option C: All frustrated people are drug addicts.
○ Statement 3 only indicates a tendency, not a certainty, that frustrated people become drug addicts. Therefore, this conclusion is not supported by the statements.
● Option D: Whimsical people are generally frustrated.
○ There is no information in the statements that connects whimsical people to being frustrated. This conclusion cannot be drawn from the given information.
Therefore, the only conclusion that logically follows from the given statements is Option B: Some drug addicts are whimsical.
Q 18. Syllogism
Examine the following statements:
1. Only those who have a pair of binoculars can become the members of the birdwatcher's club.
2. Some members of the birdwatcher's club have cameras.
3. Those members who have cameras can take part in photo-contests.
Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the above statements?
● Statement 1: Only those who have a pair of binoculars can become members of the birdwatcher's club.
○ *Interpretation*: This implies that having a pair of binoculars is a necessary condition for membership in the club. Therefore, all members must have binoculars.
● Statement 2: Some members of the birdwatcher's club have cameras.
○ *Interpretation*: This indicates that having a camera is not a requirement for membership, but some members do possess them.
● Statement 3: Those members who have cameras can take part in photo-contests.
○ *Interpretation*: This suggests that having a camera allows members to participate in photo-contests, but it does not affect their membership status.
● Conclusion Analysis:
● Option A: All those who have a pair of binoculars are members of the birdwatcher's club.
○ *Analysis*: This is incorrect because having binoculars is a necessary condition for membership, but not all binocular owners are necessarily members.
● Option B: All members of the birdwatcher's club have a pair of binoculars.
○ *Analysis*: This is correct as per Statement 1, which states that having binoculars is necessary for membership.
● Option C: All those who take part in photo-contests are members of the birdwatcher's club.
○ *Analysis*: This cannot be concluded because the statements do not specify that only club members can participate in photo-contests.
● Option D: No conclusion can be drawn.
○ *Analysis*: This is incorrect because a valid conclusion (Option B) can be drawn from the given statements.
Q 41. Syllogism
Examine the following statements:
1. None but students are members of the club.
2. Some members of the club are married persons.
3. All married persons are invited for dance.
Which one of the following conclusions can be drawn from the above statements?
● Statement 1: "None but students are members of the club."
This implies that all members of the club are students. Therefore, if someone is a member of the club, they must be a student.
● Statement 2: "Some members of the club are married persons."
This indicates that there is at least one person who is both a member of the club and married. Since all members of the club are students (from Statement 1), these married members are also students.
● Statement 3: "All married persons are invited for dance."
This means that if a person is married, they are invited for the dance.
● Conclusion Analysis:
● Option A: "All students are invited for dance."
This conclusion cannot be drawn because not all students are necessarily married, and only married persons are invited for the dance.
● Option B: "All married students of the club are invited for dance."
This conclusion can be drawn. Since all members of the club are students (Statement 1) and some of these members are married (Statement 2), and all married persons are invited for dance (Statement 3), it follows that all married students of the club are invited for dance.
● Option C: "All members of the club are married persons."
This conclusion cannot be drawn because Statement 2 only states that some members are married, not all.
● Option D: "None of the above conclusions can be drawn."
This is incorrect because Option B is a valid conclusion.
Therefore, the correct conclusion is Option B: All married students of the club are invited for dance.
Q 43. Syllogism
Consider the following statements:
1. All X-brand cars parked here are white.
2. Some of them have radial tyres.
3. All X-brand cars manufactured after 1986 have radial tyres.
4. All cars are not X-brand.
Which one of the following conclusions can be drawn from the above statements?
● Statement 1: All X-brand cars parked here are white.
This implies that if a car is X-brand and parked here, it must be white.
● Statement 2: Some of them have radial tyres.
This indicates that among the X-brand cars parked here, there are some that have radial tyres.
● Statement 3: All X-brand cars manufactured after 1986 have radial tyres.
This suggests that if an X-brand car is manufactured after 1986, it will definitely have radial tyres.
● Statement 4: All cars are not X-brand.
This means that there are cars parked here that are not X-brand, but it does not negate the presence of X-brand cars.
From these statements, we can conclude that there are some white X-brand cars with radial tyres parked here, as stated in Option B. This conclusion is supported by the combination of statements 1, 2, and 3.
● Option A: Only white cars are parked here.
This is incorrect because statement 4 indicates that not all cars are X-brand, and thus, not all cars are necessarily white.
● Option C: Cars other than X-brand cannot have radial tyres.
This is not supported by any of the statements. The statements do not provide information about the tyre types of non-X-brand cars.
● Option D: Most of the X-brand cars are manufactured before 1986.
This cannot be concluded from the given statements, as there is no information about the proportion of X-brand cars manufactured before or after 1986.
Therefore, the most logical conclusion based on the given statements is Option B.
Q 48. Syllogism
In the above figure, circle P represents hardworking people, circle Q represents intelligent people, circle R represents truthful people, and circle S represents honest people. Which region represents the people who are intelligent, honest and truthful but not hardworking?
To solve this problem, we need to identify the region in the Venn diagram that represents people who are intelligent, honest, and truthful but not hardworking. Let's break down the requirements:
● Intelligent people are represented by circle Q.
● Honest people are represented by circle S.
● Truthful people are represented by circle R.
● Not hardworking people means we exclude circle P.
We are looking for the intersection of circles Q, S, and R, but outside of circle P. This means we need the region that is common to Q, S, and R, but not overlapping with P.
In a typical Venn diagram setup:
○ The region that represents the intersection of Q, S, and R is the area where all three circles overlap.
○ We exclude any part of this intersection that also overlaps with circle P.
Therefore, the region that satisfies all these conditions is region 6. This region is part of the intersection of Q, S, and R, but it does not include any part of circle P, which represents hardworking people.
Thus, the correct answer is Option A: 6.
Q 64. Syllogism
Examine the following statements:
1. None but the rich can afford air-travel.
2. Some of those who travel by air become sick.
3. Some of those who become sick require treatment.
Which one of the following conclusions can be drawn from the above statements?
● Statement 1: "None but the rich can afford air-travel." This implies that only rich people can afford to travel by air. Therefore, anyone who travels by air must be rich.
● Statement 2: "Some of those who travel by air become sick." This indicates that there is a subset of air travelers who become sick, but it does not specify that all air travelers become sick.
● Statement 3: "Some of those who become sick require treatment." This suggests that among those who become sick, some require treatment. However, it does not provide any direct information about air travelers specifically.
● Conclusion Analysis:
● Option A: "All the rich persons travel by air." This is not necessarily true because the statement only indicates that rich people can afford air travel, not that all rich people choose to travel by air.
● Option B: "Those who travel by air become sick." This is incorrect because Statement 2 only mentions that some air travelers become sick, not all.
● Option C: "All the rich persons become sick." This is not supported by any of the statements. The statements do not imply that all rich people become sick.
● Option D: "All those who travel by air are rich." This is directly supported by Statement 1, which states that only rich people can afford air travel. Therefore, anyone who travels by air must be rich.
Thus, the correct conclusion that can be drawn from the given statements is Option D: All those who travel by air are rich.
Q 9. Syllogism
Consider the following three statements:
1. Only students can participate in the race.
2. Some participants in the race are girls.
3. All girl participants in the race are invited for coaching.
Which one of the following conclusions can be drawn from the above statements?
● Statement 1: Only students can participate in the race.
○ This implies that every participant in the race must be a student. Therefore, all participants are students.
● Statement 2: Some participants in the race are girls.
○ This indicates that there is a subset of participants who are girls.
● Statement 3: All girl participants in the race are invited for coaching.
○ This means that every girl who participates in the race is invited for coaching.
Now, let's evaluate the options:
● Option A: All participants in the race are invited for coaching.
○ This is incorrect because only girl participants are invited for coaching, not all participants.
● Option B: All students are invited for coaching.
○ This is incorrect because not all students are invited for coaching, only the girl participants are.
● Option C: All participants in the race are students.
○ This is correct as per Statement 1, which explicitly states that only students can participate in the race.
● Option D: None of the statements (a), (b), and (c) given is correct.
○ This is incorrect because Option C is correct.
Therefore, the conclusion that can be drawn from the given statements is that all participants in the race are students, which corresponds to Option C.
Q 10. Syllogism
Examine the following statements:
1. All animals are carnivorous.
2. Some animals are not carnivorous.
3. Animals are not carnivorous.
4. Some animals are carnivorous.
The approach of solving such questions is that you check the validity of each and every statement for each option. Consider any one statement to be true at one time, and then check whether that option combination can be correct. Check all 4 like this, you will know.
: If all animals are carnivorous, then the statement 3 is wrong. And if 3 is right, 1 is wrong. So, both are not true together. But if some animals are carnivorous (as per S4), the both of these are false. Hence correct option is (a). Consider S2: if 1 is correct, 2 is false. If 2 is correct, 1 has to be false. Now check other statements, 3 and 4. If 3 is correct, then 1 is incorrect, but 2 can be correct. Consider S3: Both can be true at the same time. Hence incorrect option. Consider S4: If 3 is correct, 4 is incorrect and vice versa. If 1 is correct, then 3 is incorrect, but 4 can be correct. If 2 is correct, then 3 can be correct, but 4 will be incorrect.
Q 11. Syllogism
Examine the following statements:
1. All trains are run by diesel engine.
2. Some trains are run by diesel engine.
3. No train is run by diesel engine.
4. Some trains are not run by diesel engine.
This question is exactly similar to the one above. Only the wordings have been changed. Apply the exact same technique.