Critical Reasoning — Conclusions Statement: 'We should inform all our officers not to read newspapers during office hours,' says the Chief Manager to the Chief Administrator. Which conclusion(s) follow?

Question

Solve this multiple-choice question and choose the correct option.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:A directive is proposed regarding newspaper reading during office hours. We must test two conclusions: (I) reading newspapers in office hours is desirable; (II) stopping this will not increase efficiency. Only conclusions directly implied by the statement should be accepted. Given Data / Assumptions: Proposal: Inform officers not to read newspapers during office hours. Conclusion I: Reading newspapers in office hours is desirable. Conclusion II: Office efficiency will not increase by stopping this practice. Concept / Approach: A proposal to stop an activity typically implies the proposer believes the activity is undesirable, not desirable. However, beliefs about efficiency gains are not stated; the directive might be for discipline, optics, or policy uniformity. Step-by-Step Solution: Conclusion I contradicts the spirit of the directive; it does not follow.Conclusion II is also not implied; the statement does not speak about efficiency outcomes at all. Verification / Alternative check: Even if efficiency might increase or not, nothing in the text lets us conclude either way. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Any option asserting I or II adds unstated motives or effects. Hence only 'Neither' is valid. Common Pitfalls: Confusing likely managerial motives with what strictly follows from the given sentence. Final Answer: Neither I nor II follows

Critical Reasoning — Conclusions Statement: 'We should inform all our officers not to read newspapers during office hours,' says the Chief Manager to the Chief Administrator. Which conclusion(s) follow?

More Questions from Statement and Conclusion

Discussion & Comments