Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Choose the most appropriate option for the following question.
Vaishnavi prefers Economics to Maths, English to Social science, and Political Science to History. If she prefers Maths to History, and Social science to Maths, which is Vaishnavi’s least preferred subject?
विकल्प
Economics
Maths
Social science
History
Advertisements
उत्तर
History
Explanation:
Check options-
Economics is preferred over maths.
Maths is preferred over History.
Social Science is preferred over Maths.
So, Vaishnavi's least preferred subject is History.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
The following question has two statements P and Q. They may look factually absurd. You have to ignore this absurdly and concentrate only upon the logic involved in its statement.
Mark the answer as
P: Jackals live in forests. Cities are in forests. Therefore jackals live in cities.
Q: Some tables are grass. All stools are grass. Therefore all tables are stools.
Find the odd one out :
Symphony, Orchestra, Guitar, Mob
CUP : LIP :: BIRD : ?
Master : OCUVGT :: LABOUR : ?
Read the following information carefully and answer the question given below.
Seven film buffs -Aamna, Archana, Aradhana, Anu, Aahana, Anuja, and Aashna - attend a showing of classic movies. Three films are shown, one directed by Satyajit Ray, one by Stanley Kubrick, and one by Steven Spielberg. Each of the film buff see only one of the three films. The films are shown only once, one film at a time.
The following restrictions must apply:
- Exactly twice as many of the film buffs see the Stanley Kubrick film as the Satyajit Ray film.
- Aamna and Aahana do not see the same film as each other.
- Archana and Anu do not see the same film as each other.
- Anuja and Aashna see the same film as each other.
- Aradhana sees the Stanley Kubrick film.
- Aamna sees either the Satyajit Ray film or the Steven Spielberg film.
If Anuja sees the same film as Aamna does, then which one of the following could be true?
Mediators recognize that the law is generally in place to uphold mediator - client confidentiality, however, there are situations that may occur where the mediator is under obligation to break that confidence. This obligation can vary depending upon where the mediator is practicing and it may occur as a result of their employment contract or of the law. Where such an issue does occur, the mediator is expected to firstly try and discuss the presenting issue with their client; however, in situations where the factors under consideration are particularly urgent, it is accepted that this cannot always be the case.
Mediators recognize that the law is generally in place to uphold mediator - client confidentiality, however, there are situations that may occur where the mediator is under obligation to break that confidence. This obligation can vary depending upon where the mediator is practicing and it may occur as a result of their employment contract or of the law. Where such an issue does occur, the mediator is expected to firstly try and discuss the presenting issue with their client; however, in situations where the factors under consideration are particularly urgent, it is accepted that this cannot always be the case.
Legitimate breaches of confidentiality relate to circumstances where the information the client has shared relates to anti-national activities; information of this nature must be reported. There are other circumstances where breaching confidentiality may be considered legitimate, for example, in the case of serious crime or suspected child abuse. Mediation service providers and mediators practicing independently have their own boundaries but must agree with this contractually with their client at the outset of the client - counsel relationship.
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.
The question below is given a statement followed by two assumptions numbered I and II. An assumption is something supposed or taken for granted. You have to consider the statement and the following assumptions and decide which of the assumptions is implicit in the statement.
Statement Unless country 'X' achieves total literacy, it cannot achieve its mission of development.
Assumptions
- It is possible to achieve total literacy in the country 'X'.
- No development is possible without a proper mission.
The following question, two statements are given followed by two or three Conclusions I, II, and III. 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 a shape, has volume.
- The knowledge is like water, flowing from one side to another.
Conclusions
- Knowledge is interdisciplinary.
- The knowledge is bound within a specific area.
- Knowledge influences the core of mental activity directly.
