Critical Reasoning — Assumptions Warning (Railway Compartment): “Do not lean out of the moving train.” Which assumptions are implicit in issuing this warning?

Introduction / Context:
Safety notices are posted to influence behavior and prevent harm. This item asks which background beliefs must hold for the warning to be meaningful.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I: Such warnings will have some effect (people may heed them).
• II: Leaning out of a moving train is dangerous.
• III: It is the duty of railway authorities to take care of passengers’ safety.

Concept / Approach:
For a warning to be justified, there must be a hazard (II), an expectation that warnings can reduce risk (I), and a responsibility framework (III) that motivates issuing the notice.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) II is essential: without danger, the warning is pointless.2) I is essential: if warnings never influence behavior, posting one would be futile.3) III is essential: the authority’s role in passenger safety underpins the act of issuing official warnings.

Verification / Alternative check:
Negating any of I, II, or III removes the rationale for the notice: no effect, no danger, or no duty each undermines the act.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• I and II / II and III / II only / I and III: each omits at least one necessary assumption.

Common Pitfalls:
Do not treat public safety warnings as random; they rest on hazard, influence, and duty.

Final Answer:
All are implicit