Logical Reasoning - Statement and Assumption - Discussion

I. Is not implicit because it could be the same number of drinkers but the quality of liquor has gone down.

I also agree that II is not implicit, although this one is dubious. It is implicit if several other assumptions are also made (as others have pointed out). While they may be reasonable assumptions to make, it does not mean that II is reasonable. This is similar to the murders question. Just because all evidence points to Jane, and she even confessed, doesn't mean it's reasonable to assume she did it.

Answer is D.

Assumption 1.Percentage of people consuming liquor is more in rural areas.
Explanation: Cases of food poisoning due to consumption of liquor are increasing in rural areas." Percentage of people consuming liquor is more" does not imply that the rural areas has more percentage of consumption comparatively. So, this is not implicit.

Assumption II: There are many unauthorized spurious liquor shops in the rural areas. Nowhere in the statement, we see about liquor shops.

Nowhere has it mentioned that the liquor sold is unauthorized. It might be authorized and still cause food poisoning. And since they say that the number of cases has increased, it can either mean that there is an increase in the number of people who are consuming, or more quantity is purchased by the same number of people.

According to the given information and conclusions, I is relevant.

Statement 1 says about the quantity, The people and their consumption. Assumption 1 will not be implicit.

Now see the assumption 2. Can you assume that Assumption 2 can be the reason for the statement? If yes, then it is Implicit.

These are statements and assumptions. Nothing is going to be certain. All are assumptions, we have to assume.

Neither of them. The percentage is increasing in rural areas and no mention of whether there are too many in rural areas consuming liquor. Also, it's not necessary for the liquor to be only spurious to cause food poisoning. It is also caused by poor quality or it likely makes people feel sick after drinking.

The statement doesn't imply anything about spurious liquor it only states about the liquor and the liquor can be either spurious or even the moderate ones therefore both options I and II has to be true or otherwise the question is incomplete and must mention about the grading of liquor in the statement.

Neither assumption 1 or 2 are implicit. The percentage of people consuming liquor doesn't need to be higher, the quality can be worse. Also there's nothing in the statement that indicates that the liquor is bought in the same rural areas.

Since cases of food poisoning are more in rural areas due to liquor as stated in the statement then it would directly mean that rural areas consume more liquor and hence assumption 1 is implicit.

I also agree that neither I nor II is the implicit because there is no such mention in the question that the people are getting low grade liquor and nor there is mention about the comparison.

The statement does not indicate that people in rural areas are getting low-grade liquor it just says that food poisoning cases due to consumption of liquor are increasing not spurious liquor.