Logical Reasoning - Statement and Conclusion - Discussion
Discussion Forum : Statement and Conclusion - Section 1 (Q.No. 18)
Directions to Solve
In each question below is given a statement followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true, then consider the two conclusions together and decide which of them logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given in the statement.
Give answer:
- (A) If only conclusion I follows
- (B) If only conclusion II follows
- (C) If either I or II follows
- (D) If neither I nor II follows and
- (E) If both I and II follow.
18.
Statements: All those political prisoners were released on bail who had gone to jail for reasons other than political dharnas. Bail was not granted to persons involved in murders.
Conclusions:
- No political - prisoner had committed murder.
- Some politicians were not arrested.
Answer: Option
Explanation:
According to the statement, the political prisoners can be divided into two groups - those who were released and those who were put in jail for political dharnas. However, no person involved in murder was released. This means that no political prisoner had committed murder. So, I follows. Clearly, II is not directly related to the statement and does not follow.
Discussion:
24 comments Page 1 of 3.
Pradeep Kumar Verma said:
5 years ago
If "those" is not given in statement, then first conclusion will follow.
(5)
Jasmine kaur said:
7 years ago
Option D should be the answer as the statement I saying No political - prisoner had committed murder.
Bail was not granted to persons involved in murders.
How can we be sure they have not committed murder or not? They might have been committed one, it is not proven.
Bail was not granted to persons involved in murders.
How can we be sure they have not committed murder or not? They might have been committed one, it is not proven.
(4)
Ankit G said:
8 years ago
All those politicians were released who committed any crime, other than dharna (so 'any crime' will include murder as well), were released.
But murderers are still in jail.
Hence no politician committed murder.
Because if any politician had committed murder he'd have been in jail. But only those are in jail who are charged with Dharma.
So, A is correct.
But murderers are still in jail.
Hence no politician committed murder.
Because if any politician had committed murder he'd have been in jail. But only those are in jail who are charged with Dharma.
So, A is correct.
(4)
Soma said:
5 months ago
The statement says, "All those political prisoners were released".
It doesn't say "All political prisoners were released. ".
It only refers to the subset of political prisoners who were in jail for reasons other than political dharnas.
Why This Changes the Analysis:
Conclusion I: No political prisoner has committed murder.
Revised Logic: We know that the subset of political prisoners released on bail were not involved in murders. But we don't know about the political prisoners who were jailed for political dharnas or if they were involved in murders.
Revised Validity: Conclusion I is invalid. We can't generalize about all political prisoners.
Conclusion II: Some politicians were not arrested.
Logic: As we discussed before, this conclusion is still invalid. The statements focus on those already arrested, not those who were not.
Revised Conclusion:.
Neither conclusion I nor II can be validly drawn from the given statements.
It doesn't say "All political prisoners were released. ".
It only refers to the subset of political prisoners who were in jail for reasons other than political dharnas.
Why This Changes the Analysis:
Conclusion I: No political prisoner has committed murder.
Revised Logic: We know that the subset of political prisoners released on bail were not involved in murders. But we don't know about the political prisoners who were jailed for political dharnas or if they were involved in murders.
Revised Validity: Conclusion I is invalid. We can't generalize about all political prisoners.
Conclusion II: Some politicians were not arrested.
Logic: As we discussed before, this conclusion is still invalid. The statements focus on those already arrested, not those who were not.
Revised Conclusion:.
Neither conclusion I nor II can be validly drawn from the given statements.
(3)
Barnacles said:
5 years ago
I think it's option D.
(3)
Venkatesh said:
7 years ago
There is a chance for both political dharna and murder by same politicians, then how optioin 1 is correct?
(3)
Rubbal said:
5 years ago
The Answer should be option D.
(1)
Nitu said:
8 years ago
The statement says all those political prisoners were released who had gone for reasons other than political dharnas.Therefore there is a possibility that there were politicians in jail who were imprisoned for reasons other than political dharnas as well, one of the reasons also being murder.So there could be political prisoners who are in jail for reasons of murder(i.e.other than political dharnas). Hence it cannot be definitely concluded that-No political - prisoner had committed murder.
Option D should be the answer.
Option D should be the answer.
Nakul said:
5 years ago
I think option B is correct.
Anomi. said:
6 years ago
How 1 comes true? Please explain.
Post your comments here:
Quick links
Quantitative Aptitude
Verbal (English)
Reasoning
Programming
Interview
Placement Papers