Critical Reasoning — Implicit Assumptions Statement: “If I am not well, you will have to go for the meeting,” a manager tells a subordinate. Assumptions: I. It is not necessary that only manager-level personnel attend the meeting. II. If the manager is well, he would himself like to attend the meeting.

Introduction / Context:
The manager assigns a contingency: if unwell, the subordinate will attend the meeting. We must uncover the hidden beliefs that make this direction reasonable.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Attendance can be delegated.
• Assumption I: non-managers can represent in the meeting.
• Assumption II: the manager intends to go if healthy.

Concept / Approach:
Directives often embed permissions and preferences: permission that a subordinate may attend, and preference that the manager would otherwise go himself.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Negate I: only managers may attend — the instruction becomes invalid. Negate II: the manager would not go even if well — the conditional clause becomes misleading. Both negations undermine the statement, confirming the assumptions are required.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only I or only II: misses the other essential premise.
• Either/Neither: fails the necessity test demonstrated by negation.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing “allowed to attend” with “best person to attend.” The assumption is about permission/possibility, not desirability of representation quality.

Final Answer:
Both I and II are implicit