Logical Deduction — Statements & Conclusions Statement: "Today, out of the world population of several thousand million, the majority live under governments that refuse them personal liberty and the right to dissent." Which conclusions follow?

Introduction / Context:
The statement reports a political fact about the types of governments under which most people live. It does not claim anything about individual preferences. We must therefore be cautious about conclusions concerning what people want.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Premise: Majority live under regimes that deny liberty and the right to dissent.
• Conclusion I: People are indifferent to liberty and the right to dissent.
• Conclusion II: People desire liberty and the right to dissent.

Concept / Approach:
From an external condition (government type) alone, we cannot infer internal preferences of the governed. People may desire freedoms yet be unable to secure them; or some may be indifferent. The premise is silent on desires.

Step-by-Step Solution:
I fails: The existence of oppressive governments does not prove indifference among citizens; coercion and lack of agency are alternative explanations.II fails: Similarly, we cannot infer universal desire from the political arrangement alone; the statement provides no preference data.

Verification / Alternative check:
Both conclusions propose opposite internal states. Since the premise addresses only external governance, neither internal-state claim is entailed.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• I only / II only / Both / Either: each assumes facts about preferences that are not provided.

Common Pitfalls:
Reading moral or sociological conclusions (what people want) into purely descriptive political facts (how they are ruled).

Final Answer:
Neither I nor II follows