Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: if only Conclusion II follows
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
We are given three crisp kinship statements and must test which conclusions necessarily follow.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
A conclusion follows only when it is compelled by the statements. We avoid inferring relationships that are not pinned down (e.g., brotherhood between two named people without explicit linkage).
Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Conclusion II: “Suresh is the father of Hari” directly matches statement (2) — follows immediately.2) Conclusion I: “Hari is the brother of Shyam.” Nothing in the premises says Shyam is Suresh’s son or otherwise related as a sibling to Hari. Shyam could be an uncle, cousin, neighbor, or even Suresh himself (ruled out as father but not otherwise linked). Therefore I does not follow.
Verification / Alternative check:
If we had “Shyam is Suresh’s son,” then with (2) Shyam and Hari would be brothers. That link is absent.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I: unsupported. Either I or II: wrong because I does not follow. Neither: wrong because II follows.
Common Pitfalls:
Assuming that any two male names in a family statement are brothers; overlooking the need for an explicit sibling link.
Final Answer:
if only Conclusion II follows
Discussion & Comments