In this question below, some statements are given followed by two conclusions…
2025
In this question below, some statements are given followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements, disregarding commonly known facts.
Give answer-
(a) If only conclusion I follows
(b) If only conclusion II follows
(c) If either conclusion I or II follows
(d) If neither conclusion I nor II follows
(e) If both conclusions I and II follow
Statements:
Only a few club is court.
Some court is allow.
No allow is revenue.
Conclusions:
I. Some club being allow is a possibility
II. Some court are not revenue.
- A.
(a) If only conclusion I follows
- B.
(b) If only conclusion II follows
- C.
(c) If either conclusion I or II follows
- D.
(d) If neither conclusion I nor II follows
- E.
(e) If both conclusions I and II follow
Attempted by 8 students.
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: E
Concept
A definite conclusion must be true in EVERY arrangement allowed by the statements; a possibility conclusion only needs ONE allowed arrangement in which it can be true. "Only a few X is Y" means some X are Y and some X are not Y. "No A is B" makes A and B fully exclusive, so anything that is A cannot be B.
Applying the statements
Only a few club is court: the club group and the court group overlap (some club is court) and part of club lies outside court.
Some court is allow: the court group and the allow group overlap.
No allow is revenue: the allow group and the revenue group never touch.
Testing "Some court are not revenue"
Some court is allow, and no allow is revenue. The court items that fall inside allow are therefore barred from revenue. So at least those court items are outside revenue, making "some court are not revenue" true in every valid diagram. This is a definite conclusion.
Testing "Some club being allow is a possibility"
Nothing in the statements separates club from allow. Club meets court, and court meets allow, so we can legitimately draw a diagram in which the club-court overlap also sits inside allow. Because at least one valid arrangement places some club inside allow, the possibility holds.
Result
The definite "some court are not revenue" and the possibility "some club being allow" both hold, so both conclusions follow.