Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Instructions for Question: Read the information given below to answer the question.
A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H want to have dinner on a round table and they have worked out the following seating arrangements.
(a) A will sit beside C.
(b) H will sit beside A.
(c) C will sit beside E.
(d) F will sit beside H.
(e) E will sit beside G.
(f) D will sit beside F.
(g) G will sit beside B.
(h) B will sit beside D.
A and F will become neighbours if:
विकल्प
B agrees to change her sitting position
C agrees to change her sitting position
G agrees to change her sitting position
H agrees to change her sitting position
Advertisements
उत्तर
H agrees to change her sitting position
Explanation:
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
Instructions for Question:
The following question has a main statement followed by four statements: 1, 2, 3, 4. Choose the ordered pair of statements where the first statement implies the second, and the two statements are logically consistent with the main statement.
Main statement: Either X or Y will take the only computer in the room.
1. X took the computer.
2. Y did not take the computer.
3. X did not take the computer.
4. Y took the computer.
The ordered pair of statements is:
Recently, the answers to a test held nationwide were leaked to a group of unscrupulous people. The investigative agency has arrested the mastermind and nine other people A, B, C. D, E, F, G, H and I in this matter. Interrogating them, the following facts have been obtained regarding their operation. Initially, the mastermind obtains the correct answer key. All the others create their answer key from one or two people who already possess the same. These people are called his/her "sources".
If the person has two sources, then he/she compares the answer keys obtained for both sources. If the key to a question from both sources is identical, it is copied, otherwise it is left blank.
If the person has only one source, He/she copies the source's answer into his/her copy. Finally, each person compulsorily replaces one of the answers (not a blank one) with a wrong answer in his/her answer key.
The paper contained 200 questions, so the investigative agency has ruled out the possibility of two or more of them introducing wrong answers to the same question. The investigative agency has a copy of the correct answer key and has tabulated the following data. This data represents question numbers.
| Name | Wrong Answer(s) | Blank Answer(s) |
| A | 45 | - |
| B | 96 | 46,90,25 |
| C | 2756 | 17,46,90 |
| D | 17 | - |
| E | 4690 | - |
| F | 1446 | 92,90 |
| G | 25 | - |
| H | 4692 | - |
| I | 27 | 17,26,90 |
Both G and H were sources to
Choose the most appropriate option for the following question.
Mare is to Horse as –
Architect : Building :: Sculptor : ?
Political turmoil in a country is mainly caused by widespread violence and flawed economic policies of successive governments. If at all this has to be crushed, it can be achieved only by a dictatorial government which rules with iron hand. Therefore, the need of the hour is to elect a government which imposes fresh set of stringent legislations.
The alternatives suggested (not necessarily all), if true, significantly strengthen the argument. However, one of them is most forceful. Identify the same.
In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement
- Should English be the medium of instruction for higher education in India?
Arguments
- Yes, even in advanced countries like the UK and the USA, the medium of instruction is English for higher education.
- Yes, English is a much widely spoken language in the world today.
In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement
- Should all the factories in the cities be shifted to the outskirts, far away from the main city?
Arguments
- Yes, this is an essential Step for controlling pollution in the city.
- No, such a Step will lead to a lot of inconveniences to the employees of the factories and their families as well.
In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by four arguments numbered I, II, Ill, and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement
- Should people with educational qualifications higher than the optimum requirements be debarred from seeking jobs?
Arguments
- No, it will further aggravate the problem of educated unemployment.
- Yes, it creates complexes among employees and affects the work adversely.
- No, this goes against the basic rights of the individuals.
- Yes, this will increase productivity.
A growing number of ecologists have begun to recommend lifting the ban on the hunting of leopards, which are not an endangered species, and on the international trade of leopard's skin. Why, then, do I continue to support the protection of leopards?
For the same reason, I oppose the hunting of people. Admittedly, there are far too many human beings on this planet to qualify us for inclusion on the list of endangered species. Still, I doubt the same ecologists endorsing the resumption of leopard hunting would use that fact to recommend the hunting of human beings.
Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?
In the following question, two statements are given followed by two or three Conclusions I, II, and m. You have to consider the two statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given conclusions if any follow from the given statements.
Statements
- Water has the shape, has volume.
- The knowledge is like water, flowing from one side to other.
Conclusions
- Knowledge is interdisciplinary.
- The knowledge is bound within a specific area.
- Knowledge influences the core of mental activity directly.
