Instruction — “Do not hold the cellphone or keep it in your pocket if you are very close to fuel fumes.” Question — Which conclusion necessarily follows from this safety instruction?
-
Aif only conclusion I follows
-
Bif only conclusion II follows
-
Cif either I or II follows
-
Dif neither I nor II follows, and
-
ENone of the above
Answer
Correct Answer: if only conclusion I follows
Explanation
Introduction / Context:A safety instruction warns against keeping/using a cellphone near fuel fumes. We must infer what the instruction presupposes or implies, without adding unrelated technical claims about device materials.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- The instruction links proximity to fuel fumes with a prohibition on holding/carrying a cellphone.
- It is framed to prevent risk.
Concept / Approach:Safety warnings generally imply a non-zero risk that the warned-against action could cause harm under those conditions. Here, it implies a possibility that a cellphone might ignite vapours (e.g., via spark, battery, electronics), hence the caution.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Conclusion I (“There is a possibility that cellphones could ignite fires”): This is the risk signal the instruction conveys. Follows.Conclusion II (“Cellphone is made from highly inflammable substances”): This is not implied; the risk concerns ignition sources and vapours, not that the phone’s materials are highly inflammable.Verification / Alternative check:Even if a phone’s casing is not highly inflammable, ignition risk can remain due to electrical behaviour around flammable vapours. Thus I follows while II does not.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Any option endorsing II adds a claim absent from the instruction.Common Pitfalls:Confusing “can ignite vapours” with “is itself highly inflammable.”
Final Answer:if only conclusion I follows