Difficulty: Medium
Correct Answer: Neither conclusion I nor conclusion II follows
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
This problem is a statement and conclusions question based on a defence news type context. Two brief statements describe a test of a Smart Anti Airfield Weapon. You must decide which of the two given conclusions necessarily follow from these statements, assuming the statements are fully true but not adding any extra information from outside knowledge.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
In statement and conclusion questions, a conclusion follows only if it must be true in every possible situation where the given statements are true. If we can imagine even one situation in which the statements hold but a conclusion is false, that conclusion does not logically follow. Extra details, names of people, and specific units or organisations often indicate information that goes beyond the given statements.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Examine conclusion I. The statements mention DRDO, the weapon, and an Indian Air Force aircraft but say nothing about any chairman, congratulations or messages.
Step 2: It is entirely possible that the test was successful but that no public congratulations were recorded, or that someone else conveyed them. Therefore conclusion I is not forced by the statements.
Step 3: Examine conclusion II. The statements say the test involved an Indian Air Force aircraft, but they do not specify which unit carried out the test.
Step 4: The Aircraft and System Testing Establishment is one possible unit, but the statements do not mention it. The test could have been carried out by some other squadron or testing unit.
Step 5: Since both conclusions add details that are not contained in the statements, neither is logically compelled.
Verification / Alternative check:
Imagine one scenario where the statements are true: DRDO and the Indian Air Force conduct a test flight of the weapon using a regular operational squadron aircraft, and the mission report simply notes success without any formal congratulatory message from the chairman. In this case, both statements are still true, but conclusion I is false and conclusion II may also be false if another unit conducted the test. This shows that neither conclusion must follow from the given information.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option A and option D each assume that one of the conclusions is guaranteed, which adds details about persons or specific establishments not stated in the premises. Option B treats both conclusions as following, which is even stronger and clearly unsupported. Option E suggests that exactly one of them must be true, but we have seen scenarios where both could be false while the original statements remain true.
Common Pitfalls:
A common mistake is to rely on outside knowledge about typical defence testing procedures or news reports, for example remembering that certain units often perform such tests or that senior officials usually send congratulations. In reasoning questions, you must ignore such external information and base your answer strictly on the given text.
Final Answer:
The logically correct evaluation is that neither conclusion I nor conclusion II follows from the given statements.
Discussion & Comments