Conditional Facility Rule — Lifts and Floors “Many business offices are in 2–8 floor buildings. If a building has more than 3 floors, it has a lift.” What must be true?

Introduction / Context:
This tests conditional reasoning with real-world context. The rule provided is about buildings (not specific floors): any building with more than three floors has a lift. We must deduce what necessarily follows.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• If building floors > 3, then building has a lift.
• Example range: 2–8 floor buildings are common for offices.
• We are reasoning about logical consequence, not extra assumptions about lift coverage.

Concept / Approach:
Translate the rule as: floors_count > 3 ⇒ lift_present(building). A building that has a seventh floor necessarily has more than three floors, so the rule guarantees a lift is present in that building. The statement does not specify whether the lift stops at every floor or whether lower-floor buildings cannot have lifts.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Counter-check other options: the rule says nothing about whether lifts serve all floors or only some; it also does not forbid lifts in buildings with ≤ 3 floors. Therefore, options stating those claims go beyond the rule and are not guaranteed.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• All floors may be reached by lifts: not stated; lift service pattern is unknown.
• Only floors above the third have lifts: the rule is about buildings, not per-floor lift access.
• Second floors do not have lifts: not entailed; buildings with ≤ 3 floors could still have an optional lift.

Common Pitfalls:
Misreading a building-level conditional as a floor-specific rule, or inferring prohibitions not given.

Final Answer:
Seventh floors have lifts.