In each question below is given a statement followed by two conclusions…
2025
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: The interview panel may select a candidate who neither possesses the desired qualifications nor the values and attributes.
Conclusions:
The inclusion of specialists on the interview panel does not guarantee that the selection will be proper.
The interview test has certain limitations in the matter of selection of candidates.
- A.
Only conclusion I follows
- B.
Only conclusion II follows
- C.
Either I or II follows
- D.
Both I and II follow
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: D
Concept: In a Statement-and-Conclusion item, the statement is taken as completely true, and a conclusion is accepted only if it follows beyond reasonable doubt purely from what the statement says, without importing outside assumptions. Each conclusion is tested independently against the statement; the 'either/or' pattern applies only when the two conclusions are mutually exclusive alternatives that cannot both be true together.
Application: The statement admits that the panel may end up selecting a candidate who has neither the required qualifications nor the desired values and attributes, despite an interview process meant to screen for exactly those things. This is itself an admission that the process can go wrong, so the interview test does have limitations in ensuring proper selection -- exactly what the second conclusion states. Since this kind of panel is precisely the body entrusted with judging candidates on these qualities (including through any specialist members it may draw on), the same admitted possibility of a flawed outcome shows that such involvement does not, by itself, guarantee a proper selection -- exactly what the first conclusion states. Both conclusions describe the same underlying admission from two angles, so both are independently supported and can hold true together.
Why the other options don't fit:
Accepting only the specialist-related point while rejecting the test's-limitations point overlooks that the statement's own admission of a possible flawed selection is itself evidence of a limitation in the test.
Accepting only the test's-limitations point while rejecting the specialist-related point overlooks that the same admission equally shows specialist involvement does not by itself guarantee a proper outcome.
Treating the two conclusions as alternatives (accept one, reject the other) only makes sense when they contradict each other; here both describe the same admitted possibility from different angles, so both must be accepted together rather than treated as an either/or choice.
Result: Both conclusions are independently supported by the statement, so both follow.