Logical Reasoning - Statement and Conclusion - Discussion
Discussion Forum : Statement and Conclusion - Section 1 (Q.No. 2)
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.
2.
Statements: The old order changed yielding place to new.
Conclusions:
- Change is the law of nature.
- Discard old ideas because they are old.
Answer: Option
Explanation:
Clearly, I directly follows from the given statement. Also, it is mentioned that old ideas are replaced by new ones, as thinking changes with the progressing time. So, II does not follow.
Discussion:
22 comments Page 1 of 3.
Poonam said:
1 decade ago
Here not maintioned about the law of nature then how can we conclude the first ststement that the change is law of nature.
(1)
Nizamuddin said:
1 decade ago
According to the given statements, the two conclutions are actually true, but answer I did not got.
Shaher said:
1 decade ago
The statement clearly tells that older is changed in order to give place to new. Then how can the answer b change is the law of nature. Didn't get it clearly. Do explain in detail.
Minukavya said:
1 decade ago
I do agree with Poonam and Shaher We need explanation.
Rameshwar said:
1 decade ago
The (I) conclusion that is drawn from the given statement can not be challenged.
The 2nd conclusion can be easily challenged so only I follows.
The 2nd conclusion can be easily challenged so only I follows.
Mani said:
1 decade ago
I also agree with @Poonam they did not mention about law of nature of old and new law of nature.
Water said:
1 decade ago
Looking at the solution, I think they meant "The old order changes yielding place to new. " and not "The old order changed yielding place to new. ".
(1)
Naina said:
1 decade ago
Here it is not mentioned about the law of nature. So how can we say statement 1 is correct.
(1)
Bhargavi said:
1 decade ago
Old said change yielding place to new.
Gregc said:
1 decade ago
@Rameshwar.
So what if it can't be challenged? It can't be supported either.
There's no indication that changing of old orders are a guaranteed effect of time, only that it happened once in the premise statement.
So what if it can't be challenged? It can't be supported either.
There's no indication that changing of old orders are a guaranteed effect of time, only that it happened once in the premise statement.
Post your comments here:
Quick links
Quantitative Aptitude
Verbal (English)
Reasoning
Programming
Interview
Placement Papers