Discussion :: Statement and Conclusion - Section 3 (Q.No.40)
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.
- (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.
|Julia said: (Mar 28, 2012)|
|I don't agree. The Statement says that the OSA is ONE OF THE MAJOR SOURCE - meaning there are other sources (maybe also major, maybe minor but also contributing). Therefore, abolishing the OSA will not put an end to the corruption in country X, it will simply reduce it greatly. Conclusion I should be corrected to "The OSA has to be abolished immediately to greatly reduce the corruption in the country X"|
|Santa Clause said: (Sep 8, 2015)|
|Apart from what Julia said, abolition of act is not a solution. The act can be amended to reduce corruption. So none should follow.|
|J.J. said: (Mar 10, 2016)|
|I agree with you both, either is a solution to the problems posed by this question, point being the Question itself is flawed.
As it stands now(the question) - None should Follow.
|Bernardo said: (Jan 24, 2017)|
|Totally agree with you @Julia.|
|Chamae C said: (Mar 17, 2017)|
Your statement is very true.
Post your comments here:
Email : (optional)
» Your comments will be displayed only after manual approval.