Hello and welcome to exampundit. So here is a set of Reasoning Quiz for upcoming Bank & Insurance Exam based on Syllogisms and Statements and Arguments.
Directions (Q. 1-5): In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments insofar as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a “strong” argument and which is a “weak” argument.
1) if only argument I is “strong”.
2) if only argument II is “strong”.
3) if either I or II is “strong”.
4) if neither I nor II is “strong”.
5) if both I and II are “strong”.
1. Statement: Should India open up job market to Americans or other foreigners?
I. Yes; they are more dexterous than the Indians.
II. No; it will have a cascading effect on the Indian economy because of the increase in unemployment.
2. Statement: Should a private power supply company be allowed to supply power in high-security zones?
I. Yes; a private power company supplies power reliably to highly sensitive areas.
II. No; allowing a private power company can risk security in VIP residences and offices.
3. Statement: Should Corporate India be made to foot the higher education bill?
I. Yes; the government provides huge subsidy on higher education. If Corporate India comes forward, the burden on exchequer can be reduced.
II. No; this will give an excuse to the government to get rid of social obligations.
4. Statement: Should all roads be handed over to one civic agency in each city?
I. Yes; the move will be helpful in better upkeep because a single civic agency can carry the responsibility more appropriately with strong determination and dedication.
II. No; it will result in poor condition of roads because of the monopoly and the lack of competitive environment.
5. Statement: Should India let its relations with Israel be influenced by its ties with the Arab nations?
I. Yes; Israel is the illegal occupier of Palestinian land against the will of the United Nations whereas India and Arab nations are firm supporters of the Palestinian state.
II. No; we have vested interest with both Israel and the Arab nations; the former plays an important role in our defence deal and the latter in energy deal.
Directions (Q. 6-10): In each question below are given three statements followed by four conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements, disregarding commonly known facts.
6. Statements: a. All flowers are chickens.
b. No ducks are chickens.
c. Some ducks are deer.
Conclusions: I. No flowers are ducks.
II. Some flowers are ducks.
III. Some deer are not flowers.
IV. Some deer are flowers.
1) Only I and III follow
2) Only I and either III or IV follow
3) Only III and either I or II follow
4) Only either I or II and either III or IV follow
5) None of these
7. Statements: a. No cousins are sisters.
b. Only sisters are mothers.
c. No fathers are mothers.
Conclusions: I. Some mothers are not fathers.
II. No mothers are cousins.
III. No sisters are fathers.
IV. No cousins are fathers.
1) Only I and IV follow 2) Only I, III and IV follow
3) Only I and II follow 4) Only II, III and IV follow
5) None of these
8. Statements: a. Some books are cups.
b. Some pens are books.
c. All cups are plates.
Conclusions: I. Some cups are books.
II. Some cups are not books.
III. Some pens are cups.
IV. Some plates are books.
1) Only either I or II and III follow
2) Only II and either III or IV follow
3) Only I and III follow
4) Only II and III follow
5) None of these
9. Statements: a. No books are pens.
b. No pens are pencils.
c. No pencils are erasers.
Conclusions: I. Some books are pencils.
II. Some erasers are pens.
III. Some erasers are not pens.
IV. No books are erasers.
1) Only I follows
2) Only either II or III follows
3 Only either I or IV follows
4) Only III follows
5) None of these
10. Statements: a. All boys are children.
b. All girls are children.
c. All girls are women.
Conclusions: I. Some women are children.
II. Some boys are children.
III. Some children are boys.
IV. Some girls are children.
1) Only I and II follow
2) Only I, II and IV follow
3) Only I and either II or III follow
4) All follow
5) None of these
Answers and solutions:
1. 2; Argument I is not true. Therefore, it is not strong. But argument II is strong because opening up of the job market will aggravate the problem of unemployment.
2. 1; People desire reliable power supply. And for security zones the ‘reliability’ becomes essential when the security of the area is considered. Hence, argument I is strong. Argument II is not strong because it does not go into reason.
3. 1; Huge subsidy on higher education is a burden on the exchequer. Reducing the subsidy is desirable. Hence, argument I is strong. Argument II is not necessarily true. Hence, it is a weak argument.
4. 2; I is weak because ‘determination and dedication” has nothing to do with the fact that there is one civic agency or more in the city. These characteristics can be shown even if there are several agencies. II is strong because lack of competition is not desirable.
5. 2; Argument I is not strong because it is difficult to ascertain illegality in today’s geopolitics. Argument II is strong because of the role of Israel in India’s defence.
6. 1; Statement (a) + conversion of (b) gives conclusion I [Because, A + E = E]. Hence, conclusion I follows but conclusion II does not follow. Again, conclusion I + statement (c) gives conclusion III [Because, E + I = O*]. Hence, conclusion III follows but conclusion IV does not follow.
7. 3; Conclusion I is an implication of the converted form of statement (c). Hence, conclusion I follows. Again, “Only sisters are mothers” Þ “All mothers are sisters”. Now, “All mothers are sisters” + conversion of statement (a) gives conclusion II [Because, A + E = E]. Again, statement (c) + “All mothers are sisters” gives the conclusion “Some sisters are not fathers” [Because, E + A = O*]. Hence, conclusion III does not follow. Now, statement (a) + “Some sisters are not fathers” gives no conclusion [Because, E + O = No conclusion]. Hence, conclusion IV does not follow.
8. 5; Only I and IV follow. Conclusion I follows from conversion of statement (a), whereas conclusion II does not follow. Again, statement (b) + statement (a) gives no conclusion [Because, I + I = No conclusion]. Hence, conclusion III does not follow. Again, statement (a) + statement (c) gives conclusion “Some books are plates” ® on conversion ® ”Some plates are books”. Hence, conclusion IV follows.
9. 2; We know that E + E = No conclusion. Here all the statements are of type E. Hence, a conclusion can be obtained only through conversion or implication. But the given conclusions can’t be inferred. Hence, no conclusion follows. But the conclusions II and III make a complementary pair (I-O type). Hence, either conclusion II or conclusion III follows.
10. 4; Conversion of statement (b) + Statement (c) gives the conclusion “Some children are women” [Because, I + A = I] ® on conversion ® “Some women are children”. Hence, conclusion I follows. Conclusion II follows as an implication of statement (a). Conclusion III follows from conversion of statement (a). Again, conclusion IV follows as an implication of statement (b). Hence, all conclusions follow