All Exams >
SSC CGL >
General Intelligence and Reasoning for SSC CGL >
All Questions
All questions of Evaluating Inferences for SSC CGL Exam
Statement: The local hospital has announced the opening of a new wing dedicated to cancer treatment.
Inference:
I. The hospital is expanding its facilities.
II. The hospital has a shortage of staff.
III. The new wing will only treat patients with cancer.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only III follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The local hospital has announced the opening of a new wing dedicated to cancer treatment.
Inference:
I. The hospital is expanding its facilities.
II. The hospital has a shortage of staff.
III. The new wing will only treat patients with cancer.
Inference:
I. The hospital is expanding its facilities.
II. The hospital has a shortage of staff.
III. The new wing will only treat patients with cancer.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only III follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
Malavika Rane answered |
Understanding the Statement and Inference
The statement indicates that a local hospital is opening a new wing specifically for cancer treatment. This leads us to evaluate the inferences provided.
Inference I: The hospital is expanding its facilities.
- The announcement of a new wing clearly indicates an expansion.
- This is a logical conclusion because creating additional space for cancer treatment suggests that the hospital is enhancing its capabilities.
Inference II: The hospital has a shortage of staff.
- There is no direct evidence in the statement to suggest a staff shortage.
- The opening of a new wing does not imply operational difficulties or staffing issues.
Inference III: The new wing will only treat patients with cancer.
- The wording "dedicated to cancer treatment" implies the new wing's primary focus is on cancer patients.
- Hence, it is reasonable to interpret that this wing will specialize in treating only cancer cases, although it does not exclude the possibility of treating other conditions.
Conclusion
Based on the analysis:
- Inference I is valid as it represents the hospital's expansion.
- Inference II is not supported by the statement.
- Inference III is valid as it specifies the focus of the new wing.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'C': both I and III follow.
The statement indicates that a local hospital is opening a new wing specifically for cancer treatment. This leads us to evaluate the inferences provided.
Inference I: The hospital is expanding its facilities.
- The announcement of a new wing clearly indicates an expansion.
- This is a logical conclusion because creating additional space for cancer treatment suggests that the hospital is enhancing its capabilities.
Inference II: The hospital has a shortage of staff.
- There is no direct evidence in the statement to suggest a staff shortage.
- The opening of a new wing does not imply operational difficulties or staffing issues.
Inference III: The new wing will only treat patients with cancer.
- The wording "dedicated to cancer treatment" implies the new wing's primary focus is on cancer patients.
- Hence, it is reasonable to interpret that this wing will specialize in treating only cancer cases, although it does not exclude the possibility of treating other conditions.
Conclusion
Based on the analysis:
- Inference I is valid as it represents the hospital's expansion.
- Inference II is not supported by the statement.
- Inference III is valid as it specifies the focus of the new wing.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'C': both I and III follow.
Statement: The company announced a new policy to allow employees to work from home twice a week.
Inference:
I. The company wants to improve work-life balance for its employees.
II. The company wants to reduce its office space and save costs.
III. The company is experiencing high employee turnover due to the lack of work-life balance.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The company announced a new policy to allow employees to work from home twice a week.
Inference:
I. The company wants to improve work-life balance for its employees.
II. The company wants to reduce its office space and save costs.
III. The company is experiencing high employee turnover due to the lack of work-life balance.
Inference:
I. The company wants to improve work-life balance for its employees.
II. The company wants to reduce its office space and save costs.
III. The company is experiencing high employee turnover due to the lack of work-life balance.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
Nilesh Banerjee answered |
Understanding the Statement
The company has introduced a new policy permitting employees to work from home twice a week. This decision can indicate various underlying motivations.
Inference I: Improving Work-Life Balance
- The primary aim of allowing remote work is often to enhance employees' work-life balance.
- By providing flexibility, employees can manage personal responsibilities more effectively alongside their work commitments.
- Thus, it is reasonable to infer that the company intends to improve work-life balance for its employees.
Inference II: Reducing Office Space and Costs
- Allowing employees to work from home may lead the company to reconsider its physical office space requirements.
- With fewer employees present in the office, the company could potentially save on overhead costs, such as utilities and rent.
- Therefore, the inference that the company wants to reduce its office space and save costs follows logically.
Inference III: High Employee Turnover
- While introducing remote work can be a response to high turnover rates, this inference is not directly supported by the statement.
- The policy does not provide evidence that the company is experiencing turnover issues due to a lack of work-life balance.
- Thus, this inference cannot be conclusively drawn from the information provided.
Conclusion
Given the analysis:
- Inference I is valid as it aligns with common motivations for remote work policies.
- Inference II also holds, as companies often seek cost reductions through flexible work arrangements.
- Inference III lacks direct support from the statement.
Thus, the correct answer is option 'C': If both I and II follow.
The company has introduced a new policy permitting employees to work from home twice a week. This decision can indicate various underlying motivations.
Inference I: Improving Work-Life Balance
- The primary aim of allowing remote work is often to enhance employees' work-life balance.
- By providing flexibility, employees can manage personal responsibilities more effectively alongside their work commitments.
- Thus, it is reasonable to infer that the company intends to improve work-life balance for its employees.
Inference II: Reducing Office Space and Costs
- Allowing employees to work from home may lead the company to reconsider its physical office space requirements.
- With fewer employees present in the office, the company could potentially save on overhead costs, such as utilities and rent.
- Therefore, the inference that the company wants to reduce its office space and save costs follows logically.
Inference III: High Employee Turnover
- While introducing remote work can be a response to high turnover rates, this inference is not directly supported by the statement.
- The policy does not provide evidence that the company is experiencing turnover issues due to a lack of work-life balance.
- Thus, this inference cannot be conclusively drawn from the information provided.
Conclusion
Given the analysis:
- Inference I is valid as it aligns with common motivations for remote work policies.
- Inference II also holds, as companies often seek cost reductions through flexible work arrangements.
- Inference III lacks direct support from the statement.
Thus, the correct answer is option 'C': If both I and II follow.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : Any young who makes dowry as a condition for marriage discredits himself and dishonours womanhood.Conclusion :
I. Those who take dowry in marriage should be condemned by the society.
II. Those who do not take dowry in marriage respect womanhood.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Both I and II follows.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : Any young who makes dowry as a condition for marriage discredits himself and dishonours womanhood.
Conclusion :
I. Those who take dowry in marriage should be condemned by the society.
II. Those who do not take dowry in marriage respect womanhood.
I. Those who take dowry in marriage should be condemned by the society.
II. Those who do not take dowry in marriage respect womanhood.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Both I and II follows.
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
From the statement both the conclusions follow.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : Modern man influences his destiny by the choice he makes unlike in the past.Conclusion :
I. Earlier there were less options available to them.
II. There was no desire in the past to influence the destiny.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : Modern man influences his destiny by the choice he makes unlike in the past.
Conclusion :
I. Earlier there were less options available to them.
II. There was no desire in the past to influence the destiny.
I. Earlier there were less options available to them.
II. There was no desire in the past to influence the destiny.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
Conclusion I is directly related to the statement. Hence, Conclusion I is valid, while the conclusion II is not related to the statement so it is not valid.
Statement: The government has announced a reduction in the corporate tax rate.
Inference:
I. The government wants to attract more foreign investment.
II. The government wants to increase revenue by encouraging more companies to register.
III. The government wants to improve the profitability of domestic companies.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The government has announced a reduction in the corporate tax rate.
Inference:
I. The government wants to attract more foreign investment.
II. The government wants to increase revenue by encouraging more companies to register.
III. The government wants to improve the profitability of domestic companies.
Inference:
I. The government wants to attract more foreign investment.
II. The government wants to increase revenue by encouraging more companies to register.
III. The government wants to improve the profitability of domestic companies.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Nilesh Banerjee answered |
Understanding the Government's Tax Rate Reduction
The statement indicates that the government has reduced the corporate tax rate, which can have several implications. Let’s analyze the given inferences.
Inference I: Attracting Foreign Investment
- A reduction in the corporate tax rate can make a country more appealing to foreign investors.
- Lower tax rates typically enhance the potential returns on investment, encouraging foreign companies to establish or expand their operations in the country.
- Therefore, this inference is plausible as a strategic move to attract foreign capital.
Inference II: Increasing Revenue through Company Registrations
- While a lower tax rate might encourage more companies to register, it does not guarantee an immediate increase in government revenue.
- The rationale behind this inference is that more registrations could lead to a broader tax base.
- However, the initial tax rate reduction may lead to lower revenue in the short term, as existing companies may pay less tax initially.
- Hence, this inference is less certain.
Inference III: Improving Profitability of Domestic Companies
- Reducing the corporate tax rate directly benefits domestic companies, enhancing their profitability.
- Increased profitability can lead to higher reinvestment in the business, wage growth, and overall economic stimulation.
- This inference aligns well with the goal of reducing the corporate tax rate.
Conclusion
The correct answer is option 'C' because both Inference I and Inference III logically follow from the statement regarding the reduction in the corporate tax rate. Inference II, while possible, lacks the same level of direct correlation with the government's intentions.
The statement indicates that the government has reduced the corporate tax rate, which can have several implications. Let’s analyze the given inferences.
Inference I: Attracting Foreign Investment
- A reduction in the corporate tax rate can make a country more appealing to foreign investors.
- Lower tax rates typically enhance the potential returns on investment, encouraging foreign companies to establish or expand their operations in the country.
- Therefore, this inference is plausible as a strategic move to attract foreign capital.
Inference II: Increasing Revenue through Company Registrations
- While a lower tax rate might encourage more companies to register, it does not guarantee an immediate increase in government revenue.
- The rationale behind this inference is that more registrations could lead to a broader tax base.
- However, the initial tax rate reduction may lead to lower revenue in the short term, as existing companies may pay less tax initially.
- Hence, this inference is less certain.
Inference III: Improving Profitability of Domestic Companies
- Reducing the corporate tax rate directly benefits domestic companies, enhancing their profitability.
- Increased profitability can lead to higher reinvestment in the business, wage growth, and overall economic stimulation.
- This inference aligns well with the goal of reducing the corporate tax rate.
Conclusion
The correct answer is option 'C' because both Inference I and Inference III logically follow from the statement regarding the reduction in the corporate tax rate. Inference II, while possible, lacks the same level of direct correlation with the government's intentions.
Statement: The government has announced a new policy that aims to promote the use of electric vehicles.
Inference:
I. The government is concerned about air pollution caused by traditional vehicles.
II. The government wants to reduce the country’s dependence on fossil fuels.
III. The government wants to promote the use of electric vehicles as they are more affordable than traditional vehicles.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The government has announced a new policy that aims to promote the use of electric vehicles.
Inference:
I. The government is concerned about air pollution caused by traditional vehicles.
II. The government wants to reduce the country’s dependence on fossil fuels.
III. The government wants to promote the use of electric vehicles as they are more affordable than traditional vehicles.
Inference:
I. The government is concerned about air pollution caused by traditional vehicles.
II. The government wants to reduce the country’s dependence on fossil fuels.
III. The government wants to promote the use of electric vehicles as they are more affordable than traditional vehicles.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
The statement mentions that the government has announced a new policy that aims to promote the use of electric vehicles. From this, it can be inferred that the government wants to reduce the country’s dependence on fossil fuels, as electric vehicles are powered by electricity and do not rely on fossil fuels like traditional vehicles. Therefore, option II is the only possible inference from the statement. Option I is incorrect as there is no mention of air pollution caused by traditional vehicles in the statement. Option III is incorrect as there is no mention of electric vehicles being more affordable than traditional vehicles in the statement.
Statement: The government has introduced a new tax on luxury goods.
Inference:
I. The government is trying to raise revenue.
II. The government wants to discourage the purchase of luxury goods.
III. The government wants to promote the purchase of locally made goods.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The government has introduced a new tax on luxury goods.
Inference:
I. The government is trying to raise revenue.
II. The government wants to discourage the purchase of luxury goods.
III. The government wants to promote the purchase of locally made goods.
Inference:
I. The government is trying to raise revenue.
II. The government wants to discourage the purchase of luxury goods.
III. The government wants to promote the purchase of locally made goods.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Nilesh Banerjee answered |
Understanding the Inference from the Statement
The statement indicates that the government has introduced a new tax on luxury goods. Let's analyze the provided inferences to understand why option 'C' is correct.
Inference I: The government is trying to raise revenue.
- Explanation: Introducing a tax is a common method for governments to increase their revenue. Taxing luxury goods typically targets higher-income individuals, thereby generating additional funds for public services and infrastructure. This inference logically follows from the statement.
Inference II: The government wants to discourage the purchase of luxury goods.
- Explanation: Taxing luxury items can serve as a deterrent, making these goods more expensive and potentially decreasing their consumption. This inference aligns with the intent of imposing a luxury tax, aiming to reduce the demand for such products. Thus, this inference also follows from the statement.
Inference III: The government wants to promote the purchase of locally made goods.
- Explanation: The introduction of a tax on luxury goods does not inherently suggest a promotion of locally made products. There is no direct correlation between taxing luxury items and encouraging local goods. Therefore, this inference does not necessarily follow from the statement.
Conclusion
Based on this analysis:
- I and II are valid inferences that stem from the government's action of taxing luxury goods.
- III is not a valid inference as it does not logically connect to the tax's purpose.
Thus, the correct answer is option 'C', as both I and II follow logically from the statement.
The statement indicates that the government has introduced a new tax on luxury goods. Let's analyze the provided inferences to understand why option 'C' is correct.
Inference I: The government is trying to raise revenue.
- Explanation: Introducing a tax is a common method for governments to increase their revenue. Taxing luxury goods typically targets higher-income individuals, thereby generating additional funds for public services and infrastructure. This inference logically follows from the statement.
Inference II: The government wants to discourage the purchase of luxury goods.
- Explanation: Taxing luxury items can serve as a deterrent, making these goods more expensive and potentially decreasing their consumption. This inference aligns with the intent of imposing a luxury tax, aiming to reduce the demand for such products. Thus, this inference also follows from the statement.
Inference III: The government wants to promote the purchase of locally made goods.
- Explanation: The introduction of a tax on luxury goods does not inherently suggest a promotion of locally made products. There is no direct correlation between taxing luxury items and encouraging local goods. Therefore, this inference does not necessarily follow from the statement.
Conclusion
Based on this analysis:
- I and II are valid inferences that stem from the government's action of taxing luxury goods.
- III is not a valid inference as it does not logically connect to the tax's purpose.
Thus, the correct answer is option 'C', as both I and II follow logically from the statement.
Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.Statement : Should there be uniform for students of the colleges in India as in the schools ?
Arguments :
I. Yes, this will improve the ambiance of the colleges as all students will be decently dressed.
II. No, the college students should not be regimented and they should be left to choose their clothes for coming to the college.- a)Only argument I is strong.
- b)Only Argument II is strong.
- c)Either I or II is strong.
- d)Neither I nor II is strong.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should there be uniform for students of the colleges in India as in the schools ?
Arguments :
I. Yes, this will improve the ambiance of the colleges as all students will be decently dressed.
II. No, the college students should not be regimented and they should be left to choose their clothes for coming to the college.
Arguments :
I. Yes, this will improve the ambiance of the colleges as all students will be decently dressed.
II. No, the college students should not be regimented and they should be left to choose their clothes for coming to the college.
a)
Only argument I is strong.
b)
Only Argument II is strong.
c)
Either I or II is strong.
d)
Neither I nor II is strong.
|
Arnav Saini answered |
Understanding the Arguments
In the context of the statement about college uniforms in India, we need to evaluate the strength of each argument provided.
Argument I: Support for Uniforms
- Ambiance Improvement: The argument suggests that uniforms would enhance the college environment by ensuring all students are decently dressed.
- Uniformity: This can promote a sense of equality among students and reduce distractions related to personal attire.
- Evaluation: While aesthetically appealing, the argument lacks consideration for personal expression and the diverse backgrounds of college students. It feels more like a preference rather than a compelling reason.
Argument II: Opposition to Uniforms
- Personal Freedom: This argument emphasizes the importance of self-expression and individuality among college students.
- Regimentation Concerns: It highlights that college is a transitional phase where students should learn to make their own choices, including their attire.
- Evaluation: This argument is strong because it addresses the values of freedom and personal identity, which are crucial at the college level. It recognizes the maturity of students and their right to express themselves.
Conclusion
In summary, while Argument I presents a valid point about ambiance, it does not outweigh the importance of personal freedom highlighted in Argument II. College students are generally at an age where self-expression is vital, making Argument II the stronger position. Thus, the correct answer is option 'B': Only Argument II is strong.
In the context of the statement about college uniforms in India, we need to evaluate the strength of each argument provided.
Argument I: Support for Uniforms
- Ambiance Improvement: The argument suggests that uniforms would enhance the college environment by ensuring all students are decently dressed.
- Uniformity: This can promote a sense of equality among students and reduce distractions related to personal attire.
- Evaluation: While aesthetically appealing, the argument lacks consideration for personal expression and the diverse backgrounds of college students. It feels more like a preference rather than a compelling reason.
Argument II: Opposition to Uniforms
- Personal Freedom: This argument emphasizes the importance of self-expression and individuality among college students.
- Regimentation Concerns: It highlights that college is a transitional phase where students should learn to make their own choices, including their attire.
- Evaluation: This argument is strong because it addresses the values of freedom and personal identity, which are crucial at the college level. It recognizes the maturity of students and their right to express themselves.
Conclusion
In summary, while Argument I presents a valid point about ambiance, it does not outweigh the importance of personal freedom highlighted in Argument II. College students are generally at an age where self-expression is vital, making Argument II the stronger position. Thus, the correct answer is option 'B': Only Argument II is strong.
Statement: The number of tourists visiting the country has increased by 20% compared to last year.
Inference:
I. The country has recently opened up more tourist attractions.
II. The country has increased its marketing efforts to attract more tourists.
III. The country has relaxed its visa requirements for tourists.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The number of tourists visiting the country has increased by 20% compared to last year.
Inference:
I. The country has recently opened up more tourist attractions.
II. The country has increased its marketing efforts to attract more tourists.
III. The country has relaxed its visa requirements for tourists.
Inference:
I. The country has recently opened up more tourist attractions.
II. The country has increased its marketing efforts to attract more tourists.
III. The country has relaxed its visa requirements for tourists.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
The statement mentions that the number of tourists visiting the country has increased by 20% compared to last year. From this, it can be inferred that the country has increased its marketing efforts to attract more tourists. This is a logical inference from the given statement. Option I is incorrect as there is no mention of the country opening up more tourist attractions. Option III is also incorrect as there is no information provided in the statement about whether the country has relaxed its visa requirements for tourists.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : Reading maketh a full man, conference a ready man writing an exact man.Conclusion :
I. Pointed and precise expression comes only through extensive writing.
II. Extensive reading makes a complete man.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Both I and II follows.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : Reading maketh a full man, conference a ready man writing an exact man.
Conclusion :
I. Pointed and precise expression comes only through extensive writing.
II. Extensive reading makes a complete man.
I. Pointed and precise expression comes only through extensive writing.
II. Extensive reading makes a complete man.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Both I and II follows.
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
I follows from the fact that writing makes an exact man. Conclusion II also directly follows from the statement.
Statement: The company’s profits have doubled in the last quarter.
Inference:
I. The company’s revenue has also doubled in the last quarter.
II. The company’s expenses have remained the same in the last quarter.
III. The company has been successful in increasing its profit margins.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The company’s profits have doubled in the last quarter.
Inference:
I. The company’s revenue has also doubled in the last quarter.
II. The company’s expenses have remained the same in the last quarter.
III. The company has been successful in increasing its profit margins.
Inference:
I. The company’s revenue has also doubled in the last quarter.
II. The company’s expenses have remained the same in the last quarter.
III. The company has been successful in increasing its profit margins.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
Iq Funda answered |
The statement mentions that the company’s profits have doubled in the last quarter. From this, it can be inferred that the company has been successful in increasing its profit margins. It can also be inferred that the company’s revenue has also doubled in the last quarter, as this would be necessary for the profits to double. Therefore, options I and III are possible inferences from the statement. Option II is incorrect as there is no mention of the company’s expenses in the statement.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : The cabinet of state X took certain steps to tackle the milk glut in the state as the cooperative and government dairies failed to use the available milk. - News report.Conclusion :
I. The milk production of State X is more than its need.
II. The Government and co-operative daries in State X are not equipped in terms of resources and technology to handle such excess milk.- a)Only conclusion I follows
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Both I and II follows.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : The cabinet of state X took certain steps to tackle the milk glut in the state as the cooperative and government dairies failed to use the available milk. - News report.
Conclusion :
I. The milk production of State X is more than its need.
II. The Government and co-operative daries in State X are not equipped in terms of resources and technology to handle such excess milk.
I. The milk production of State X is more than its need.
II. The Government and co-operative daries in State X are not equipped in terms of resources and technology to handle such excess milk.
a)
Only conclusion I follows
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Both I and II follows.
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
The use of the term 'milk glut' makes I implicit. Also, the fact that the cooperatives and Government dairies failed to use the available milk indicates that they lack the proper infrastructure to handle such quantities of Milk. So, II also Follows.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : Now-a-days, the sale of television sets of company X has increased.Conclusion :
I. The sale of television sets of other company has decreased.
II. The sale of television sets of company X was nil in past.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : Now-a-days, the sale of television sets of company X has increased.
Conclusion :
I. The sale of television sets of other company has decreased.
II. The sale of television sets of company X was nil in past.
I. The sale of television sets of other company has decreased.
II. The sale of television sets of company X was nil in past.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
T.S Academy answered |
In the statement, nothing is said about the sale of television sets of the other companies. Hence, conclusion I is not valid while the second conclusion is not related to the statement. Hence, it is also not valid.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : A medical College has started a cell which will conduct counseling workshops in the field of stress management to patients and general public.Conclusion :
I. The hospital has needed resources to start such activity.
II. Patients and general public feel a need to have such cell in the hospital.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Both I and II follows.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : A medical College has started a cell which will conduct counseling workshops in the field of stress management to patients and general public.
Conclusion :
I. The hospital has needed resources to start such activity.
II. Patients and general public feel a need to have such cell in the hospital.
I. The hospital has needed resources to start such activity.
II. Patients and general public feel a need to have such cell in the hospital.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Both I and II follows.
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
Since, The hospital has started the activity, it must have been well-equipped for the same. So, I follows. Also, any new activity is started keeping in mind the need for it. So, II also follows.
Statement: The government has announced a new tax policy that will increase taxes on luxury goods.
Inference:
I. The government wants to discourage people from buying luxury goods.
II. The government wants to generate more revenue through taxes.
III. The government is trying to address income inequality by targeting luxury goods.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The government has announced a new tax policy that will increase taxes on luxury goods.
Inference:
I. The government wants to discourage people from buying luxury goods.
II. The government wants to generate more revenue through taxes.
III. The government is trying to address income inequality by targeting luxury goods.
Inference:
I. The government wants to discourage people from buying luxury goods.
II. The government wants to generate more revenue through taxes.
III. The government is trying to address income inequality by targeting luxury goods.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Iq Funda answered |
The statement mentions that the government has announced a new tax policy that will increase taxes on luxury goods. From this, it can be inferred that the government wants to generate more revenue through taxes. Therefore, option II is the only possible inference from the statement. Option I is incorrect as there is no mention of the government wanting to discourage people from buying luxury goods in the statement. Option III is also incorrect as there is no mention of the government trying to address income inequality by targeting luxury goods in the statement.
Statement: A new study has found that people who exercise regularly have a lower risk of developing heart disease.
Inference:
I. People who don’t exercise regularly are guaranteed to develop heart disease.
II. Exercise is the only factor that affects the risk of developing heart disease.
III. Regular exercise can help reduce the risk of developing heart disease.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: A new study has found that people who exercise regularly have a lower risk of developing heart disease.
Inference:
I. People who don’t exercise regularly are guaranteed to develop heart disease.
II. Exercise is the only factor that affects the risk of developing heart disease.
III. Regular exercise can help reduce the risk of developing heart disease.
Inference:
I. People who don’t exercise regularly are guaranteed to develop heart disease.
II. Exercise is the only factor that affects the risk of developing heart disease.
III. Regular exercise can help reduce the risk of developing heart disease.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Iq Funda answered |
The statement mentions that a new study has found that people who exercise regularly have a lower risk of developing heart disease. From this, it can be inferred that regular exercise can help reduce the risk of developing heart disease. This is a logical inference from the given statement. However, it is not mentioned that people who don’t exercise regularly are guaranteed to develop heart disease, making option I incorrect. Option II is also incorrect as exercise is not the only factor that affects the risk of developing heart disease.
Statement: The price of oil has increased by 10% in the past month.
Inference:
I. The demand for oil has increased in the past month.
II. The supply of oil has decreased in the past month.
III. The price of other commodities has also increased in the past month.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The price of oil has increased by 10% in the past month.
Inference:
I. The demand for oil has increased in the past month.
II. The supply of oil has decreased in the past month.
III. The price of other commodities has also increased in the past month.
Inference:
I. The demand for oil has increased in the past month.
II. The supply of oil has decreased in the past month.
III. The price of other commodities has also increased in the past month.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
The statement mentions that the price of oil has increased by 10% in the past month. From this, it can be inferred that either the demand for oil has increased or the supply of oil has decreased, or both. Therefore, options I and II are both possible inferences from the statement. Option III is incorrect as there is no mention of the price of other commodities in the statement.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : If you are a good artist, then we have definitely a job for you.Conclusion :
I. You are a good artist.
II. We are in need of good artist.Both I and II follows- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : If you are a good artist, then we have definitely a job for you.
Conclusion :
I. You are a good artist.
II. We are in need of good artist.
I. You are a good artist.
II. We are in need of good artist.
Both I and II follows
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
Conclusion II follows from the statement because in the statement it is given that if you are a good artist then we have definitely a job for you. From this, it is clear that we are in need of a good artist.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : Books without knowledge of life are useless..Conclusion :
I. All books contain knowledge of life.
II. People should try to gain the knowledge of life.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : Books without knowledge of life are useless..
Conclusion :
I. All books contain knowledge of life.
II. People should try to gain the knowledge of life.
I. All books contain knowledge of life.
II. People should try to gain the knowledge of life.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
None of the conclusion follows from the statement.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : Today out of the world population of several thousand million, the majority of men have to live under governments which refuse them personal liberty and the right to dissent.Conclusion :
I. People are indifferent to personal liberty and the right to dissent.
II. People desire personal liberty and the right to dissent.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : Today out of the world population of several thousand million, the majority of men have to live under governments which refuse them personal liberty and the right to dissent.
Conclusion :
I. People are indifferent to personal liberty and the right to dissent.
II. People desire personal liberty and the right to dissent.
I. People are indifferent to personal liberty and the right to dissent.
II. People desire personal liberty and the right to dissent.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
|
Iq Funda answered |
It is mentioned in the statement that most people are forced to live under Governments which refuse them from personal liberty and the right to dissent. This means that they are not indifferent to these rights but have a desire for them. So, only I follows.
Statement: The sales of the company have increased by 15% in the last quarter.
Inference:
I. The company has launched a new product in the last quarter.
II. The company has improved its marketing strategies in the last quarter.
III. The overall market for the company’s products has grown in the last quarter.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The sales of the company have increased by 15% in the last quarter.
Inference:
I. The company has launched a new product in the last quarter.
II. The company has improved its marketing strategies in the last quarter.
III. The overall market for the company’s products has grown in the last quarter.
Inference:
I. The company has launched a new product in the last quarter.
II. The company has improved its marketing strategies in the last quarter.
III. The overall market for the company’s products has grown in the last quarter.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
The statement mentions that the sales of the company have increased by 15% in the last quarter. From this, it can be inferred that either the company has launched a new product, improved its marketing strategies, or the overall market for the company’s products has grown, or a combination of these factors. Therefore, options II and III are both possible inferences from the statement. Option I is incorrect as there is no mention of the company launching a new product in the statement.
Statement: The company has announced a voluntary recall of its popular product.
Inference:
I. The company has discovered a defect in its product.
II. The company wants to improve customer satisfaction.
III. The company is facing a lawsuit related to its product.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only III follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both I and III follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The company has announced a voluntary recall of its popular product.
Inference:
I. The company has discovered a defect in its product.
II. The company wants to improve customer satisfaction.
III. The company is facing a lawsuit related to its product.
Inference:
I. The company has discovered a defect in its product.
II. The company wants to improve customer satisfaction.
III. The company is facing a lawsuit related to its product.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only III follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both I and III follow
|
Target Study Academy answered |
The statement mentions that the company has announced a voluntary recall of its popular product. From this, it can be inferred that the company has discovered a defect in its product, which could be potentially dangerous for the customers. Therefore, option I is a possible inference from the statement. Option II is incorrect as there is no mention of the company wanting to improve customer satisfaction in the statement. Option III is also incorrect as there is no mention of the company facing a lawsuit related to its product in the statement.
Statement: The latest polls suggest that the ruling party is likely to win the upcoming election by a large margin.
Inference:
I. The opposition party should withdraw from the election.
II. The ruling party is the most popular choice among voters.
III. The election results have already been decided.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The latest polls suggest that the ruling party is likely to win the upcoming election by a large margin.
Inference:
I. The opposition party should withdraw from the election.
II. The ruling party is the most popular choice among voters.
III. The election results have already been decided.
Inference:
I. The opposition party should withdraw from the election.
II. The ruling party is the most popular choice among voters.
III. The election results have already been decided.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Iq Funda answered |
The statement mentions that the latest polls suggest that the ruling party is likely to win the upcoming election by a large margin. From this, it can be inferred that the ruling party is the most popular choice among voters. This is the only logical inference from the given statement. Option I is incorrect as it is not mentioned that the opposition party should withdraw from the election. Option III is also incorrect as it is not mentioned that the election results have already been decided.
Statement: The city council has approved a new law prohibiting smoking in public parks.
Inference:
I. The city council believes that smoking in public parks is harmful to the environment.
II. The new law will make it illegal to smoke in public parks.
III. The city council is trying to promote healthy habits among its citizens.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The city council has approved a new law prohibiting smoking in public parks.
Inference:
I. The city council believes that smoking in public parks is harmful to the environment.
II. The new law will make it illegal to smoke in public parks.
III. The city council is trying to promote healthy habits among its citizens.
Inference:
I. The city council believes that smoking in public parks is harmful to the environment.
II. The new law will make it illegal to smoke in public parks.
III. The city council is trying to promote healthy habits among its citizens.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
The statement mentions that the city council has approved a new law prohibiting smoking in public parks. From this, it can be inferred that the new law will make it illegal to smoke in public parks. This is a logical inference from the given statement. Option I is incorrect as the statement does not mention that the city council believes that smoking in public parks is harmful to the environment. Option III is also incorrect as the statement does not mention that the city council is trying to promote healthy habits among its citizens.
Statement: The government has announced a new policy to reduce carbon emissions by 50% in the next 10 years.
Inference:
I. The government is taking steps to combat climate change.
II. The new policy will have no impact on the environment.
III. The government is not interested in reducing carbon emissions.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both I and III follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The government has announced a new policy to reduce carbon emissions by 50% in the next 10 years.
Inference:
I. The government is taking steps to combat climate change.
II. The new policy will have no impact on the environment.
III. The government is not interested in reducing carbon emissions.
Inference:
I. The government is taking steps to combat climate change.
II. The new policy will have no impact on the environment.
III. The government is not interested in reducing carbon emissions.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both I and III follow
|
|
Iq Funda answered |
The statement mentions that the government has announced a new policy to reduce carbon emissions by 50% in the next 10 years. From this, it can be inferred that the government is taking steps to combat climate change. This is a logical inference from the given statement. Option II is incorrect as the statement mentions the specific goal of reducing carbon emissions, indicating that the new policy will have an impact on the environment. Option III is also incorrect as the statement directly contradicts this inference.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : Women's organizations in India have welcomed the amendment of the Industrial Employment Rules 1946 to curb sexual harassment at the work place.Conclusion :
I. Sexual harassment of women at work place is more prevalent in India as compared to other developed countries.
II. Many organizations in India will stop recruiting women to avoid such problems.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : Women's organizations in India have welcomed the amendment of the Industrial Employment Rules 1946 to curb sexual harassment at the work place.
Conclusion :
I. Sexual harassment of women at work place is more prevalent in India as compared to other developed countries.
II. Many organizations in India will stop recruiting women to avoid such problems.
I. Sexual harassment of women at work place is more prevalent in India as compared to other developed countries.
II. Many organizations in India will stop recruiting women to avoid such problems.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
The fact that a certain rule has been more welcomed in a certain country does not imply that the problem is more prevalent there. So, I does not follows. Also, The amendment seeks to discourage only sexual harassment of women and shall in no way discourage employment of women. So, II does not follow.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : India's economy is depending mainly on forests.Conclusion :
I. Tree should be preserved to improve Indian economy.
II. India wants only maintenance of forests to improve economic conditions.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : India's economy is depending mainly on forests.
Conclusion :
I. Tree should be preserved to improve Indian economy.
II. India wants only maintenance of forests to improve economic conditions.
I. Tree should be preserved to improve Indian economy.
II. India wants only maintenance of forests to improve economic conditions.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
It is mentioned in the the statement that India's economy depends mainly on forests. This means that forests should be preserved. So, I follows. But, that only preservation of forests can improve the economy, cannot be said. So, II does not follow.
Statement: The school district has announced that all students will have to wear uniforms starting next semester.
Inference:
I. The school district is trying to save money by not having to provide different clothes to students.
II. Students will no longer be able to express their individuality through their clothing choices.
III. The new uniform policy will improve student behavior and academic performance.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The school district has announced that all students will have to wear uniforms starting next semester.
Inference:
I. The school district is trying to save money by not having to provide different clothes to students.
II. Students will no longer be able to express their individuality through their clothing choices.
III. The new uniform policy will improve student behavior and academic performance.
Inference:
I. The school district is trying to save money by not having to provide different clothes to students.
II. Students will no longer be able to express their individuality through their clothing choices.
III. The new uniform policy will improve student behavior and academic performance.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
Glance Learning Institute answered |
The statement mentions that the school district has announced that all students will have to wear uniforms starting next semester. From this, it can be inferred that students will no longer be able to express their individuality through their clothing choices. This is a logical inference from the given statement. Additionally, it is commonly believed that uniform policies can improve student behavior and academic performance, which is why option III can also be inferred. Option I is incorrect as it is not mentioned that the school district is trying to save money by not having to provide different clothes to students.
Statement: The CEO of the company has resigned, citing personal reasons.
Inference:
I. The company’s financial performance has been poor under the CEO’s leadership.
II. The CEO’s resignation is unexpected.
III. The company will struggle to find a suitable replacement for the CEO.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The CEO of the company has resigned, citing personal reasons.
Inference:
I. The company’s financial performance has been poor under the CEO’s leadership.
II. The CEO’s resignation is unexpected.
III. The company will struggle to find a suitable replacement for the CEO.
Inference:
I. The company’s financial performance has been poor under the CEO’s leadership.
II. The CEO’s resignation is unexpected.
III. The company will struggle to find a suitable replacement for the CEO.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
The statement mentions that the CEO of the company has resigned, citing personal reasons. From this, it can be inferred that the CEO’s resignation is unexpected. Therefore, option II is the only possible inference from the statement. Option I is incorrect as there is no mention of the company’s financial performance under the CEO’s leadership in the statement. Option III is also incorrect as there is no mention of the company struggling to find a suitable replacement for the CEO in the statement.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement :Until our country achieves economic equality, political freedom and democracy would be meaningless.Conclusion :
I. Political freedom and democracy go hand in hand.
II. Economic equality leads to real political freedom and democracy.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement :Until our country achieves economic equality, political freedom and democracy would be meaningless.
Conclusion :
I. Political freedom and democracy go hand in hand.
II. Economic equality leads to real political freedom and democracy.
I. Political freedom and democracy go hand in hand.
II. Economic equality leads to real political freedom and democracy.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
|
Iq Funda answered |
There is nothing mentioned about the relation between political freedom and democracy. So, I does not follow. But II directly follows from the given statement.
Statement: The government has announced a new policy to encourage the use of public transport.
Inference:
I. The government is concerned about air pollution.
II. The government wants to reduce traffic congestion.
III. The government wants to increase revenue from public transport.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The government has announced a new policy to encourage the use of public transport.
Inference:
I. The government is concerned about air pollution.
II. The government wants to reduce traffic congestion.
III. The government wants to increase revenue from public transport.
Inference:
I. The government is concerned about air pollution.
II. The government wants to reduce traffic congestion.
III. The government wants to increase revenue from public transport.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
The statement mentions that the government has announced a new policy to encourage the use of public transport. From this, it can be inferred that the government wants to reduce traffic congestion by encouraging people to use public transport. It can also be inferred that the government is concerned about air pollution, as public transport is often seen as a more environmentally friendly option than private vehicles. Therefore, options I and II are possible inferences from the statement. Option III is incorrect as there is no mention of the government wanting to increase revenue from public transport in the statement.
Statement: The government has announced a ban on the use of single-use plastic bags in all stores across the country.
Inference:
I. People will have to start carrying their own reusable bags when they go shopping.
II. All stores will have to shut down as they will not be able to use plastic bags anymore.
III. The ban on single-use plastic bags will not have any impact on the environment.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both I and III follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The government has announced a ban on the use of single-use plastic bags in all stores across the country.
Inference:
I. People will have to start carrying their own reusable bags when they go shopping.
II. All stores will have to shut down as they will not be able to use plastic bags anymore.
III. The ban on single-use plastic bags will not have any impact on the environment.
Inference:
I. People will have to start carrying their own reusable bags when they go shopping.
II. All stores will have to shut down as they will not be able to use plastic bags anymore.
III. The ban on single-use plastic bags will not have any impact on the environment.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both I and III follow
|
|
T.S Academy answered |
The statement mentions that the government has announced a ban on the use of single-use plastic bags in all stores across the country. From this, it can be inferred that people will have to start carrying their own reusable bags when they go shopping. This is the only logical inference from the given statement. Option II is incorrect as it is not mentioned that all stores will have to shut down as they will not be able to use plastic bags anymore. Option III is also incorrect as it is mentioned that the ban on single-use plastic bags is to have a positive impact on the environment.
Statement: The company has decided to lay off 500 employees due to financial losses.
Inference:
I. The company is facing financial difficulties.
II. The employees who were laid off were not performing well.
III. The company will be able to recover from its financial losses after the layoffs.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only III follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both I and III follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The company has decided to lay off 500 employees due to financial losses.
Inference:
I. The company is facing financial difficulties.
II. The employees who were laid off were not performing well.
III. The company will be able to recover from its financial losses after the layoffs.
Inference:
I. The company is facing financial difficulties.
II. The employees who were laid off were not performing well.
III. The company will be able to recover from its financial losses after the layoffs.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only III follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both I and III follow
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
The statement mentions that the company has decided to lay off 500 employees due to financial losses. From this, it can be inferred that the company is facing financial difficulties. This is a logical inference from the given statement. Option II is incorrect as there is no mention of the performance of the employees who were laid off. Option III is also incorrect as there is no information provided in the statement about whether the company will be able to recover from its financial losses after the layoffs.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : Most of the Indian States existed before independence.Conclusion :
I. Some Indian States existed before independence.
II. Some Indian States did not exist before independence.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : Most of the Indian States existed before independence.
Conclusion :
I. Some Indian States existed before independence.
II. Some Indian States did not exist before independence.
I. Some Indian States existed before independence.
II. Some Indian States did not exist before independence.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
According to the statement most of the Indian states existed before independence. It means not all the Indian States existed before independence. Hence, II conclusion is logically valid.
Statement: The police have arrested a suspect in connection with the robbery that took place last night.
Inference:
I. The police have enough evidence to prove that the arrested person committed the robbery.
II. The robbery was a well-planned and organized crime.
III. The police are taking steps to prevent such incidents from happening in the future.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The police have arrested a suspect in connection with the robbery that took place last night.
Inference:
I. The police have enough evidence to prove that the arrested person committed the robbery.
II. The robbery was a well-planned and organized crime.
III. The police are taking steps to prevent such incidents from happening in the future.
Inference:
I. The police have enough evidence to prove that the arrested person committed the robbery.
II. The robbery was a well-planned and organized crime.
III. The police are taking steps to prevent such incidents from happening in the future.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
The statement mentions that the police have arrested a suspect in connection with the robbery that took place last night. From this, it can be inferred that the police have enough evidence to prove that the arrested person committed the robbery. This is a logical inference from the given statement. Option II is incorrect as there is no mention of whether the robbery was well-planned and organized or not. Option III is also incorrect as there is no mention of whether the police are taking steps to prevent such incidents from happening in the future.
Statement: The company has announced that it will be laying off 500 employees due to financial difficulties.
Inference:
I. The company is struggling to stay afloat.
II. The laid-off employees were not performing well.
III. The remaining employees will receive a pay raise.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The company has announced that it will be laying off 500 employees due to financial difficulties.
Inference:
I. The company is struggling to stay afloat.
II. The laid-off employees were not performing well.
III. The remaining employees will receive a pay raise.
Inference:
I. The company is struggling to stay afloat.
II. The laid-off employees were not performing well.
III. The remaining employees will receive a pay raise.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Glance Learning Institute answered |
The statement mentions that the company has announced that it will be laying off 500 employees due to financial difficulties. From this, it can be inferred that the company is struggling to stay afloat. This is a logical inference from the given statement. Option II is incorrect as it is not mentioned that the laid-off employees were not performing well. Option III is also incorrect as it is not mentioned that the remaining employees will receive a pay raise.
Statement: The city council has approved a new plan to build more affordable housing.
Inference:
I. The cost of housing in the city is very high.
II. There is a shortage of affordable housing in the city.
III. The city council wants to increase property values.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The city council has approved a new plan to build more affordable housing.
Inference:
I. The cost of housing in the city is very high.
II. There is a shortage of affordable housing in the city.
III. The city council wants to increase property values.
Inference:
I. The cost of housing in the city is very high.
II. There is a shortage of affordable housing in the city.
III. The city council wants to increase property values.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
The statement mentions that the city council has approved a new plan to build more affordable housing. From this, it can be inferred that there is a shortage of affordable housing in the city. Therefore, option II is a possible inference from the statement. Option I is incorrect as there is no mention of the cost of housing in the city in the statement. Option III is incorrect as there is no mention of the city council wanting to increase property values in the statement.
Statement: The education system needs to be reformed to meet the needs of modern society.
Inference:
I. The current education system is outdated.
II. The current education system is not producing graduates with relevant skills.
III. The modern society requires a different set of skills from what is currently being taught in schools.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If all of them follow
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The education system needs to be reformed to meet the needs of modern society.
Inference:
I. The current education system is outdated.
II. The current education system is not producing graduates with relevant skills.
III. The modern society requires a different set of skills from what is currently being taught in schools.
Inference:
I. The current education system is outdated.
II. The current education system is not producing graduates with relevant skills.
III. The modern society requires a different set of skills from what is currently being taught in schools.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If all of them follow
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
The statement mentions that the education system needs to be reformed to meet the needs of modern society. From this, it can be inferred that the current education system is outdated and is not producing graduates with relevant skills. Additionally, it can be inferred that modern society requires a different set of skills from what is currently being taught in schools. Therefore, all options I, II, and III are possible inferences from the statement.
Statement: The number of tourists visiting the country has decreased significantly this year.
Inference:
I. The tourism industry in the country is facing challenges.
II. The country is not a popular tourist destination.
III. The government needs to take measures to promote the country as a tourist destination.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The number of tourists visiting the country has decreased significantly this year.
Inference:
I. The tourism industry in the country is facing challenges.
II. The country is not a popular tourist destination.
III. The government needs to take measures to promote the country as a tourist destination.
Inference:
I. The tourism industry in the country is facing challenges.
II. The country is not a popular tourist destination.
III. The government needs to take measures to promote the country as a tourist destination.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
The statement mentions that the number of tourists visiting the country has decreased significantly this year. From this, it can be inferred that the tourism industry in the country is facing challenges. Therefore, option I is the only possible inference from the statement. Option II is incorrect as there is no mention of the country not being a popular tourist destination in the statement. Option III is also incorrect as there is no mention of the government needing to take measures to promote the country as a tourist destination in the statement.
Statement: The university has decided to offer a new course on artificial intelligence.
Inference:
I. The demand for courses in artificial intelligence is increasing.
II. The university wants to attract more international students.
III. The university has expertise in artificial intelligence.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only III follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The university has decided to offer a new course on artificial intelligence.
Inference:
I. The demand for courses in artificial intelligence is increasing.
II. The university wants to attract more international students.
III. The university has expertise in artificial intelligence.
Inference:
I. The demand for courses in artificial intelligence is increasing.
II. The university wants to attract more international students.
III. The university has expertise in artificial intelligence.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only III follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Target Study Academy answered |
The statement mentions that the university has decided to offer a new course on artificial intelligence. From this, it can be inferred that the university has expertise in artificial intelligence. It can also be inferred that the demand for courses in artificial intelligence is increasing, as the university is offering a new course on this topic. Therefore, options I and III are possible inferences from the statement. Option II is incorrect as there is no mention of the university wanting to attract more international students in the statement.
Statement: The company has announced a new product line that includes eco-friendly packaging.
Inference:
I. The company is committed to reducing its carbon footprint.
II. The company is responding to customer demand for more eco-friendly products.
III. The company’s new product line will be more expensive than its existing products.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The company has announced a new product line that includes eco-friendly packaging.
Inference:
I. The company is committed to reducing its carbon footprint.
II. The company is responding to customer demand for more eco-friendly products.
III. The company’s new product line will be more expensive than its existing products.
Inference:
I. The company is committed to reducing its carbon footprint.
II. The company is responding to customer demand for more eco-friendly products.
III. The company’s new product line will be more expensive than its existing products.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
The statement mentions that the company has announced a new product line that includes eco-friendly packaging. From this, it can be inferred that the company is committed to reducing its carbon footprint. It can also be inferred that the company is responding to customer demand for more eco-friendly products. Therefore, options I and II are possible inferences from the statement. Option III is incorrect as there is no mention of the new product line being more expensive than the existing products in the statement.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :Statement : Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six month.Conclusion :
I. Fashion designers do not understand the public mind very well.
II. The public by and large is highly susceptible to novelty.- a)Only conclusion I follows.
- b)Only conclusion II follows.
- c)Either I or II follows.
- d)Neither I or II follows.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by two conclusions. Give answer :
Statement : Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six month.
Conclusion :
I. Fashion designers do not understand the public mind very well.
II. The public by and large is highly susceptible to novelty.
I. Fashion designers do not understand the public mind very well.
II. The public by and large is highly susceptible to novelty.
a)
Only conclusion I follows.
b)
Only conclusion II follows.
c)
Either I or II follows.
d)
Neither I or II follows.
|
|
Target Study Academy answered |
The statement asserts that people cannot stand any particular trend for long and seek change quite often. So, only II follows.
Statement: A study shows that people who regularly eat breakfast tend to have lower rates of obesity and other health problems.
Inference:
I. Skipping breakfast causes obesity and other health problems.
II. Eating breakfast regularly can prevent obesity and other health problems.
III. People who are obese should stop eating breakfast.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: A study shows that people who regularly eat breakfast tend to have lower rates of obesity and other health problems.
Inference:
I. Skipping breakfast causes obesity and other health problems.
II. Eating breakfast regularly can prevent obesity and other health problems.
III. People who are obese should stop eating breakfast.
Inference:
I. Skipping breakfast causes obesity and other health problems.
II. Eating breakfast regularly can prevent obesity and other health problems.
III. People who are obese should stop eating breakfast.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
The statement suggests that people who regularly eat breakfast tend to have lower rates of obesity and other health problems. This means that eating breakfast can prevent these health problems, which is the only logical inference from the given statement. Option I is incorrect as it is not mentioned that skipping breakfast causes obesity and other health problems. Option III is also incorrect as it is not mentioned that people who are obese should stop eating breakfast.
Statement: The government has announced a new tax on sugary drinks.
Inference:
I. The government is trying to reduce the consumption of sugary drinks.
II. The tax will generate revenue for the government.
III. The tax on sugary drinks will be the only tax imposed by the government.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only II follows
- c)If both I and II follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The government has announced a new tax on sugary drinks.
Inference:
I. The government is trying to reduce the consumption of sugary drinks.
II. The tax will generate revenue for the government.
III. The tax on sugary drinks will be the only tax imposed by the government.
Inference:
I. The government is trying to reduce the consumption of sugary drinks.
II. The tax will generate revenue for the government.
III. The tax on sugary drinks will be the only tax imposed by the government.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only II follows
c)
If both I and II follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
Ssc Cgl answered |
The statement mentions that the government has announced a new tax on sugary drinks. From this, it can be inferred that the government is trying to reduce the consumption of sugary drinks by making them more expensive through the tax. This is a logical inference from the given statement. Additionally, it can be inferred that the tax will generate revenue for the government, as taxes are a source of government revenue. Therefore, option II is also correct. Option III is incorrect as there is no mention of whether the tax on sugary drinks will be the only tax imposed by the government.
Statement: The school has announced a new policy to promote gender equality.
Inference:
I. The school previously had a policy that discriminated against certain genders.
II. The new policy will have no impact on the students.
III. The school values gender equality and is taking steps to promote it.- a)If only I follows
- b)If only III follows
- c)If both I and III follow
- d)If both II and III follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: The school has announced a new policy to promote gender equality.
Inference:
I. The school previously had a policy that discriminated against certain genders.
II. The new policy will have no impact on the students.
III. The school values gender equality and is taking steps to promote it.
Inference:
I. The school previously had a policy that discriminated against certain genders.
II. The new policy will have no impact on the students.
III. The school values gender equality and is taking steps to promote it.
a)
If only I follows
b)
If only III follows
c)
If both I and III follow
d)
If both II and III follow
|
|
EduRev SSC CGL answered |
The statement mentions that the school has announced a new policy to promote gender equality. From this, it can be inferred that the school values gender equality and is taking steps to promote it. This is a logical inference from the given statement. Option I is incorrect as there is no mention of whether the school previously had a policy that discriminated against certain genders. Option II is also incorrect as the statement does not mention anything about the impact of the new policy on the students.
Chapter doubts & questions for Evaluating Inferences - General Intelligence and Reasoning for SSC CGL 2025 is part of SSC CGL exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the SSC CGL exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for SSC CGL 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of Evaluating Inferences - General Intelligence and Reasoning for SSC CGL in English & Hindi are available as part of SSC CGL exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for SSC CGL Exam by signing up for free.
General Intelligence and Reasoning for SSC CGL
201 videos|226 docs|197 tests
|
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup on EduRev and stay on top of your study goals
10M+ students crushing their study goals daily