Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed…

In "Statement and Conclusion" reasoning, a conclusion follows only when it is a strict, direct inference from the given statement alone — a paraphrase using close synonyms is valid, but a conclusion that adds an absolute or exclusivity word (such as "only", "always", "never") not present in the statement goes beyond what the statement supports and does not follow.

The statement pairs three causes with three effects: reading with becoming a full man, conference with becoming a ready man, and writing with becoming an exact man. Conclusion I restates the writing-exactness link but inserts "only", claiming precise expression comes exclusively through writing — a claim the statement never makes, since it does not rule out other routes to precision. Conclusion II restates the reading-fullness link as reading making a "complete" man, which is simply a synonym of "full", and "extensive" is a mild intensifier rather than an exclusivity claim, so it stays within what the statement supports.

Checking the other combinations against the statement:

• "Only conclusion I follows" — wrongly accepts the "only" claim in I as a direct restatement, when "only" introduces an exclusivity the statement does not state.

• "Either I or II follows" — wrongly treats I and II as mutually exclusive alternatives about the same fact, when they concern different, independent parts of the statement (writing vs. reading).

• "Both I and II follow" — wrongly groups I and II as equivalent restatements, missing that only one of them adds an unsupported absolute word.

So conclusion II alone is a valid, direct inference from the statement; conclusion I fails because of the added word "only".