Statement–Assumption (Laundry Science and Product Choice): Statement: “Detergent should be used to clean clothes.” Assumptions: I) Detergents form more lather than alternative cleaning agents. II) Detergents help dislodge greasy stains and particulate dirt from fabric fibers.

Introduction / Context:
This is a classic Statement–Assumption item from verbal reasoning. The statement recommends using detergent to clean clothes. We must identify which hidden belief(s) must be true for the recommendation to be meaningful. In such questions, an assumption is “implicit” only if negating it would make the stated recommendation pointless or illogical.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Given statement: Use detergent to clean clothes.
• Assumption I: Detergents form more lather.
• Assumption II: Detergents dislodge grease and dirt.

Concept / Approach:
When evaluating assumptions, test necessity by denial: If the assumption were false, would the original recommendation collapse? Focus on the minimum technical property required for cleaning effectiveness rather than peripheral or merely common features (like foam volume).

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Assess Assumption II: If detergents do not help remove grease and dirt, the reason for recommending them for cleaning disappears. Hence, II is necessary for the statement’s logic.2) Assess Assumption I: Extra lather is not a necessary condition for cleaning; foam is often a cosmetic or user-feedback attribute. Many low-foaming detergents clean exceptionally well, and some highly foaming agents clean poorly. Therefore, I is not essential.3) Therefore, only II must hold for the recommendation to make sense.

Verification / Alternative check:
Consider modern high-efficiency (HE) detergents formulated for front-load machines: they are low-foaming by design yet clean effectively. This confirms that “more lather” is not a prerequisite for recommending detergents. However, detergents’ surfactants lowering surface tension and emulsifying oils is core to their cleaning action, validating II.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only I” confuses a visible by-product (foam) with the mechanism of action. “Either” treats two different claims as interchangeable. “Neither” ignores the essential surfactant action. “Both” over-commits to foam as necessary.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating cleaning power with foam quantity; assuming “more bubbles = better cleaning.” The mechanism is surfactant-driven emulsification and suspension of dirt, not the foam height.

Final Answer:
Only Assumption II is implicit.