- C
Given the ambiguities arising from the incomplete nature of the information, statement III cannot be deduced. Statements I and II may be deduced however.
- C
Here it’s possible for more than one statement to give correct information. It turns out that I is false because Mr. Edward’s dog won 2nd prize and the Airedale 3rd. II is false because Mr. Grossman’s dog is Jack. III correctly identifies the winners of 2nd, 3rd and 4th prizes.
D
The easiest procedure is to jot down the information given in the specified statements.
Although much remains ambiguous without statements (2) and (5) (for example, who owns which dog), statements I, II and III all follow by a process of elimination.
A
This can be read from the diagram.
C
The author infers from the fact that people cannot help making the ethical judgements that they make (which follows from the first two statements of his argument) that we should be tolerant of their opinions ; and this is just what follows if we add choice C to the premises. The author may or may not believe choice A or choice B, but in any case they are not required for his argument so, these two choices are wrong.
C
Susan can take the two maths courses in any of the pairs of months in A, B, D and E because they satisfy all the conditions in the above statement. Only the pair C i.e. November and January is not possible because any one of the above conditions may not be fulfilled.
D
It will not be possible for Susan to take maths course in D i.e. October, January, February as it does not satisfy the conditions stated in the statement.
- E
Susan must take language in March if she has to satisfy all the conditions in the statement.
D
January, February, April and May are the months, she must take geography courses because they alone satisfy the conditions in the given statements. The rest i.e. A, B, C & E do not satisfy the conditions in the statement.
|