Statement–Assumption — “If he is intelligent, he will pass the examination.” Assumptions: I. To pass the examination, he must be intelligent (intelligence is necessary). II. He will, in fact, pass the examination.

Introduction / Context:
This is a logic item. The statement is a conditional (If P then Q). We must avoid reading additional claims into it.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• P: He is intelligent. Q: He will pass.
• The speaker asserts a sufficient condition, not a necessary one.
• No claim is made about whether P is true, or whether Q holds independently.

Concept / Approach:
For “If P then Q,” it is not assumed that Q requires P (necessity), nor that P actually holds, nor that Q will occur. The statement only sets a rule: whenever P holds, Q follows. Therefore neither I (which converts sufficiency into necessity) nor II (which affirms the consequent without basis) is required.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) I claims intelligence is necessary to pass. The original statement does not assert that; non-intelligent candidates might pass via other means (hard work, coaching, luck). Hence I is not implicit.2) II asserts the outcome Q, but the antecedent P may or may not be true. The conditional does not guarantee Q in the absence of P, so II is not implicit.

Verification / Alternative check:
Logical form: P → Q does not entail Q, nor Q → P, nor ¬P → ¬Q. The statement merely states sufficiency.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Any option endorsing I or II reads more than the conditional provides.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing necessary with sufficient conditions; affirming the consequent.

Final Answer:
if neither I nor II is implicit.