In each question below is given a statement followed by two conclusions…
2024202420252023
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.
Statements: Prime age school-going children in urban India have now become avid as well as more regular viewers of television, even in households without a TV. As a result there has been an alarming decline in the extent of readership of newspapers.
Conclusions: I. Method of increasing the readership of newspapers should be devised.
II. A team of experts should be sent to other countries to study the impact of TV. on the readership of newspapers.
- A.
Only conclusion I follows
- B.
Only conclusion II follows
- C.
Either I or II follows
- D.
Neither I nor II follows
Attempted by 3 students.
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: D
CONCEPT: In a ‘Statement and Conclusion’ reasoning item, a conclusion is valid only if it is a fact that must necessarily be true given the statement alone — a strict logical entailment. A conclusion is NOT valid merely because it sounds sensible: a recommendation, a proposed remedy, or new information the statement never raised does not qualify, however reasonable it seems.
APPLICATION: Testing each conclusion against the statement, which only reports that TV viewership among urban school children has risen and that newspaper readership has correspondingly declined — it makes no claim about what should be done next.
Conclusion I recommends that a method to increase newspaper readership “should be devised.” This is a prescriptive suggestion, not a fact implied by the statement — the statement reports a decline but never states or implies that corrective steps are necessary or already underway. So conclusion I does not follow.
Conclusion II recommends sending a team of experts abroad to study TV’s impact on readership. The statement never raises the idea of a comparative international study anywhere; this conclusion introduces information that goes well beyond what is stated. So conclusion II does not follow either.
CROSS-CHECK: An ‘either’/‘or’ verdict is reserved for a pair of conclusions that are complementary opposites of each other, so that if one is false the other must be true. Conclusion I and Conclusion II here are two unrelated proposals (a readership-boosting initiative versus an international comparative study), not complementary alternatives — so a forced-choice ‘either/or’ reading does not fit this pair either.
RESULT: Since neither conclusion is a definite logical inference from the stated facts, the correct choice is the one stating that neither conclusion follows.