Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Read the following information carefully and choose the appropriate option in the questions given below:
i. There is a group of five persons – A, B, C, D and E.
ii. One of them is a Singer, one is a Dancer, one is a Painter, one is a teacher and one is a Doctor.
iii. Three of them – A, C and Doctor prefer rice to chapatti and two of them – B and the Painter prefer chapatti to rice.
iv. The Teacher, D and A are friends to one another but two of these prefer chapatti to rice.
v. The Singer is C’s brother.
Who is a Dancer?
Options
C
E
D
A
Advertisements
Solution
C
Explanation:
| Person | Profession | Preference |
| A | Singer | Rice to Chapatti |
| B | Teacher | Chapatti to rice |
| C | Dancer | Rice ti Chapati |
| D | Painter | Chapatti to Rice |
| E | Doctor | Rice to Chapatti |
C is a Dancer.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
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: All fish can fly. Some fish are birds. All birds are naughty. Therefore some naughty can fly.
Q: Some fish are birds. All birds are naughty. Therefore all fish are naughty.
Who among the following is the odd one in the following group of persons?
Chief Justice of India, Attorney General of India, Solicitor General, Advocate General
Choose the most appropriate option:
Geeta is twice the present age of Seema. If age of Seema is 20 years now, how many years ago Geeta was three times Seema's age?
The question contains six statements followed by four sets of combinations of three. Choose the set, which gives the most logical triad. i.e. the third statement mentioned should be a conclusion drawn from the first two statements.
- X and Y are siblings.
- X and Y do not quarrel.
- Siblings are known to quarrel often.
- X and Y quarrel often.
- All those who quarrel are siblings.
- X and Y cannot be siblings.
Read the following case and answer the question.
Sakshi is the Vice-President in an electrical equipment company in Delhi. One day, her subordinate Bhaskar requested that Kishen, a project manager, be transferred to the Mumbai office from the Delhi office. In Mumbai, Kishen would work alone as a researcher. Bhaskar gave the following reasons for his request "Kishen is known for fighting frequently with colleagues of his team. He cannot accept criticism and feels rejected and get hostile. He is overbearing and is generally a bad influence on the team. Sakshi called upon Samir, another project manager and sought further information on Kishen. Samir recalled that a former colleague, Lalit (who was also Kishen's former boss) has made few remarks on Kishen in his appraisal report. In his opinion, Kishen was not fit for further promotion as he was emotionally unstable to work in groups in spite of the fact that he had seven years of work experience. Lalit has described Kishen as to author it alive to work under anyone. Lalit has further told Samir that Kishen had an ailing wife and an old mother, who does not want to stay with his wife.
Consider the following solutions to the problem mentioned above
I. Sakshi should transfer Kishen to Mumbai office.
II. Sakshi should try and verify the facts from other sources as well.
III. Kishen should be sacked.
IV. Kishen should be demoted.
V. Sakshi should suggest Kishen visit a family counsellor.
Which of the following statements, if true would weaken the decision to sack Kishen the most?
Read the following short passage and choose the best answer to the question following the passage.
Cuisine from the north of China is one of the most popular kinds of food in India. But this is not the case for Southern Chinese cuisine. In fact, in a recent survey, Southern Chinese cuisine was voted one of the least popular styles of cooking in the country.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent paradox described above?
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?
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 Many species of animals on our earth are still not studied scientifically and if we do not do this work urgently, many species will face extinction.
Assumptions
- Earth may lose all types of life very shortly.
- It is desirable and possible to study scientifically many animal species.
In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments. 'Strong' arguments must be both important and directly related to the question. 'Weak' arguments may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspects of the question. The question below is followed by three arguments numbered I, II, and ill. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.
Statement
- Should there be a limit on drawing groundwater for irrigation purposes in India?
Arguments
- No, irrigation is of prime importance for food production in India and it is heavily dependent on groundwater in many parts of the country.
- Yes, water tables have gone down to alarmingly low levels in some parts of the country where irrigation is primarily dependent on groundwater, which may lead to serious environmental consequences.
- Yes, India just cannot afford to draw groundwater any further as the international agencies have cautioned India against it.
The question below is given a statement followed by three courses of action numbered I, II, and ill. A course of action is a step or administrative decision to be taken for improvement, follow-up, or further action in regard to the problem, policy, etc. On the basis of information given in the statement, you have to assume everything in the statement to be true and then decide which of the three given suggested courses of action logically follows worth pursuing. Then, decide which of the alternatives (a), (b), (c), or (d) is correct.
Statement The police have failed to protect the elderly citizens of society. Only last week three old persons were killed at three different places.
Courses of Action
I. The police should be asked to take special care of women and children.
II. The Government should bring legislation against the killing of elderly people.
III. Criminals who are accused of killing elderly people should be prosecuted by the state.
