Logical Reasoning - Statement and Assumption - Discussion
Discussion Forum : Statement and Assumption - Section 4 (Q.No. 24)
Directions to Solve
In each question below is given a statement followed by two assumptions numbered I and II. You have to consider the statement and the following assumptions and decide which of the assumptions is implicit in the statement.
Give answer
- (A) If only assumption I is implicit
- (B) If only assumption II is implicit
- (C) If either I or II is implicit
- (D) If neither I nor II is implicit
- (E) If both I and II are implicit.
24.
Statement: Money is the root cause of all the problems in a family.
Assumptions:
- Every problem is caused by something.
- There are always some problems in a family.
Answer: Option
Explanation:
The statement mentions the cause of family problems and does not deal with all the problems. So, I is not implicit. Also, it is mentioned that money is the cause of family problems. But this does not mean that problems always exist in a family. So, II is also not implicit.
Discussion:
23 comments Page 1 of 3.
Yash Singh said:
1 year ago
According to me, either option E, or C would be the answer as they both follow logical statements.
(1)
Anonymous said:
2 years ago
From my point of view, I choose E as the correct answer.
(1)
Vaibhav said:
2 years ago
If every problem has a root cause of money that means every problem has something as a root cause how can it be neither?
Anyone, explain it to me.
Anyone, explain it to me.
(3)
Maahee Godq said:
3 years ago
Option A and B are wrong because both have extreme terminologies-EVERY & ALWAYS.
Miu said:
6 years ago
I also don't understand why A is incorrect. It's still there, like it's still true though, right? Doesn't every problem originate somewhere? Please clarify again, thanks!
(2)
Kevin said:
6 years ago
After reading the answer by @Neeraj I felt enlightened!
The statement: Given a family F, suppose Pf is a problem with the family and Rpf is the root cause of the problem. Then it is necessarily true that R is money.
I: There exists a cause c for any problem p.
II: There exists a problem p for any family f.
So from this, I can see that my usual understanding of "implicit assumption" is OK for this problem. I am not sure yet if I have been missing similar logic issues in other of these questions I've been attempting to analyze.
The statement: Given a family F, suppose Pf is a problem with the family and Rpf is the root cause of the problem. Then it is necessarily true that R is money.
I: There exists a cause c for any problem p.
II: There exists a problem p for any family f.
So from this, I can see that my usual understanding of "implicit assumption" is OK for this problem. I am not sure yet if I have been missing similar logic issues in other of these questions I've been attempting to analyze.
Bastian said:
7 years ago
Why not option 1?
Param said:
9 years ago
The answer is E.
Gaurav said:
9 years ago
I think both I and II are implicit.
Because it is the universal truth there is always a cause for every problem.
And there is always some sort of unfinished talk or a problem that arises in a family.
Because it is the universal truth there is always a cause for every problem.
And there is always some sort of unfinished talk or a problem that arises in a family.
Trishul said:
1 decade ago
I is definitely implicit. Remove that assumption and you will find that the statement doesn't hold true anymore because it says all problems in a family are caused by money.
Post your comments here:
Quick links
Quantitative Aptitude
Verbal (English)
Reasoning
Programming
Interview
Placement Papers