Logical deduction – "all mountaineers climb": Determine the valid implication involving Amit. (i) Amit is a mountaineer. (ii) Amit is not a mountaineer. (iii) Amit climbed. (iv) Amit did not climb.

Introduction / Context:The universal statement is Mountaineer ⇒ Climbs. So for any named individual, if they are a mountaineer, we can infer that they climb.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• (i) being true forces (iii) to be true.

Concept / Approach:Pick the pair that states the antecedent category followed by the necessary action: (i) (iii).

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:(iii) (i) is converse; climbing alone does not prove mountaineer status.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:(ii) (iv) asserts a separate possibility but is not a consequence of the universal statement.

Common Pitfalls:Conflating subset and superset relationships.

Final Answer:(i) (iii)