Question 1

Critical Reasoning – Identify the Implicit Assumption(s) Statement: “These apples are too cheap to be good.” Assumptions: I. When the apple crop is abundant, prices go down. II. The lower the selling price, the worse is the quality of the commodity.…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The sentence connects price to quality: “too cheap to be good.” This is a reasoning pattern where low price is taken as an indicator of poor quality. We must pinpoint which assumption the speaker must be relying on for the statement to make sense.Given Data / Assumptions:Speaker observes a low price for apples.Conclusion: quality must be poor.Assumption I: Abundant crop reduces price.Assumption II: Lower price implies inferior quality.Assumption III: Very cheap apples are good (contradictory).Concept / Approach:We test each assumption using the “necessity” and “negation” tests. The assertion directly hinges on a price–quality inverse link. Harvest size or market supply (I) could explain price but is not needed to infer quality. Assumption III plainly conflicts with the conclusion and therefore cannot be implicit.Step-by-Step Solution:Assumption II: If lower price does not generally signal lower quality, the statement collapses. Hence II is necessary.Assumption I: Even if price fell due to ample supply, the quality conclusion could still be drawn without I. Not necessary.Assumption III: Opposes the claim. Not implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Negate II: If “low price does not imply poor quality,” then “too cheap to be good” is not justified—confirming II is implicit.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Options mentioning I or III add unnecessary or contradictory content.“None/All implicit” do not fit the logic.Common Pitfalls:Confusing market-cause assumptions (abundance) with the evaluative assumption (price–quality link).Final Answer:Only II is implicit

Question 2

Critical Reasoning – Identify the Implicit Assumption(s) Statement: “All are cordially invited to attend the entertainment programme. It is free.” (Newspaper announcement) Assumptions: I. People generally do not go to entertainment programmes that a…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:Public invitations often highlight “free entry” to attract larger audiences. The logic usually targets affordability barriers rather than making claims about quality or general human behavior toward free events. Our task is to locate the necessary assumption(s) behind this notice.Given Data / Assumptions:Invitation emphasizes “free.”Assumption I: People avoid free events (unlikely premise for inviting).Assumption II: Some people want to attend but cannot afford tickets.Assumption III: Free programmes are generally good in quality.Concept / Approach:The key persuasive element is removing a price barrier. That requires assuming there exists a segment of interested but price-constrained individuals. No assumption about universal aversion to free events or guaranteed quality is necessary.Step-by-Step Solution:Assumption II: If nobody is constrained by ticket prices, “free” loses its attraction power. Therefore II is necessary.Assumption I: If people generally do not go to free programmes, making it free would not help; the notice would undermine itself. Not implicit.Assumption III: The claim does not hinge on quality judgements; it focuses on access. Not implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Negate II: With no price-constrained audience, the “free” message is redundant. This undermines the intent of the announcement.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Any option including I or III assumes more than needed (or contradicts the purpose).Common Pitfalls:Assuming “free” always equals “high quality”; the notice never claims that.Final Answer:Only II is implicit

Question 3

Critical Reasoning – Identify the Implicit Assumption(s) Scenario: Ravi plans to leave office at 4:00 p.m. to catch a flight to Bangalore departing at 6:00 p.m. Assumptions: I. The flight to Bangalore may be delayed. II. He may be able to reach the …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:Planning decisions encode assumptions about timing and logistics. Ravi fixes a departure from office at 4:00 p.m. for a 6:00 p.m. flight. We are to find which assumption(s) are necessary for this plan to be sensible, without adding unnecessary or speculative details.Given Data / Assumptions:Flight departure: 6:00 p.m.Office departure: 4:00 p.m.Assumption I: Flight may be delayed.Assumption II: He can reach the airport before 6:00 p.m.Assumption III: He may get adequate time to search for a vehicle.Concept / Approach:For a plan to be rational, the core necessity is feasibility: the chosen departure time must allow reaching the airport before the flight departs. Speculative benefits (like delay) or specific means (searching for a vehicle) are not required unless stated.Step-by-Step Solution:II is essential: if reaching before 6:00 p.m. were not plausible, the plan would be irrational. Hence II is implicit.I is not necessary: Ravi’s plan does not rely on a delay; it assumes the scheduled time holds.III is too specific: he may pre-book a cab or have a driver; “search time” is not essential. Not implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Negate II: If he cannot reach before 6:00 p.m., the plan fails—confirming II is necessary.Why Other Options Are Wrong:“All” and options including I or III add unneeded assumptions.“None” ignores the basic feasibility assumption.Common Pitfalls:Reading extra logistics (vehicle search) into a simple schedule decision.Final Answer:Only II is implicit

Question 4

Critical Reasoning – Identify the Implicit Assumption(s) Statement: “Put a notice on the board that all employees should come to the office on time,” an officer tells his assistant. Assumptions: I. All employees come late. II. Employees read such no…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:This workplace instruction targets punctuality via an official notice. We must identify which assumptions the officer necessarily relies on when issuing the directive to post a notice.Given Data / Assumptions:An office notice will be posted, telling employees to be on time.Assumption I: All employees come late.Assumption II: Employees read notices on the board.Assumption III: Employees will comply with the instruction.Concept / Approach:For any communication-based action to work, two minimal premises are required: reception (employees will read/receive the message) and compliance (at least a reasonable expectation that many will act accordingly). The claim that “all employees come late” is not necessary; even a subset coming late can justify the notice.Step-by-Step Solution:I is too strong; the problem may concern some employees only. Not implicit.II is necessary; if employees do not read the board, posting is pointless. Implicit.III is necessary; issuing a notice presumes it will influence behavior. Implicit.Verification / Alternative check:Negate II or III and the intervention becomes ineffective, contradicting the rationale for posting the notice.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Any option including I assumes more than required.Options excluding II or III strip away communication or compliance assumptions that make the act rational.Common Pitfalls:Equating “problem exists” with “everyone is at fault.”Final Answer:Only II and III are implicit

Question 5

Critical Reasoning – Identify the Implicit Assumption(s) Statement: The professor announced in class that the next periodical examination will be held on the 15th of the next month. Assumptions: I. All students may appear in the examination. II. The…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:Announcing an exam date encodes certain basic premises about the feasibility of holding that exam. We must uncover which assumption(s) are necessary for the announcement to be meaningful without overstating the case.Given Data / Assumptions:Exam date set for the 15th of next month.Assumption I: All students may appear.Assumption II: The college will be open on that date.Assumption III: Students can study until the 15th to pass.Concept / Approach:The essential requirement is the institution’s operational status on the specified date. Universal attendance (I) is not required; examinations proceed even with absentees. The preparation window (III) is a student strategy issue, not a prerequisite for scheduling an exam.Step-by-Step Solution:II is necessary: exams cannot be conducted if the college is closed. Hence implicit.I is not necessary: some students may be absent; the announcement still stands.III is not necessary: the professor’s announcement does not presume a specific study pattern.Verification / Alternative check:Negate II (college closed): the announcement becomes infeasible, contradicting the statement’s purpose. This confirms II.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Options including I or III assume extra details not required for scheduling.“None of these” ignores the operational premise in II.Common Pitfalls:Interpreting an exam announcement as a claim about students’ intentions or study strategies.Final Answer:Only II is implicit

Question 6

Critical Reasoning – Identify the Implicit Assumption(s) Statement: “The situation in this area continues to be tense and out of control. People are requested to remain in their homes.” Assumptions: I. There had been some serious incidents. II. Peop…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:Public safety advisories typically follow disturbances. Here, authorities request residents to stay indoors due to a tense, uncontrolled situation. We must determine what must be true for such a request to be rational and necessary.Given Data / Assumptions:Tension and lack of control are explicitly stated.Assumption I: Serious incidents have occurred (or are highly probable).Assumption II: People will not go to the office.Assumption III: Normalcy will return soon.Concept / Approach:The request presupposes a credible threat, usually evidenced by serious incidents. It does not need predictions about office attendance or timelines for restoration to justify the directive.Step-by-Step Solution:I is implicit: the advisory implies danger due to incidents or imminent risk; without such gravity, a stay-home request would be unwarranted.II is not implicit: the advisory does not assume outcomes; it only instructs. Compliance is hoped for, but “will not go to office” is a consequence, not a premise.III is not implicit: no timeline is stated; advising caution does not presuppose quick restoration.Verification / Alternative check:Negate I: with no serious incidents or risk, the instruction lacks justification—contradicting the statement’s intent.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Options adding II or III assume future behavior or timeframes that are not required.“All” and “None” ignore the evident safety premise.Common Pitfalls:Confusing recommendations with guaranteed behavior; assuming timelines from safety notices.Final Answer:Only I is implicit

Question 7

Critical Reasoning – Identify the Implicit Assumption(s) Advertisement Slogan: “Television X – the neighbour’s envy, the owner’s pride.” Assumptions: I. Catchy slogans appeal to people. II. People are envious of neighbours’ superior possessions. III…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:Advertising copy often leverages emotional triggers. The slogan “neighbour’s envy, owner’s pride” aims to attract buyers by combining aspirational identity (pride) with social comparison (envy). We must identify which assumptions are necessary for this creative to work as intended.Given Data / Assumptions:Slogan built around envy and pride.Assumption I: Catchy, memorable slogans influence audiences.Assumption II: Envy exists toward neighbours’ better possessions.Assumption III: Consumers desire to own things that make others envy them.Concept / Approach:An ad is purposeless unless the message format (slogan) appeals to the target audience. The chosen theme also presupposes that social comparison and status signaling motivate purchases. Without II or III, the slogan’s psychological hook would fail.Step-by-Step Solution:I is implicit: the ad counts on a catchy line to capture attention and aid recall.II is implicit: the ad taps into an existing tendency to compare possessions with neighbours.III is implicit: it assumes buyers would like to experience “owner’s pride,” even if that also induces envy in others.Verification / Alternative check:Negate any of I–III and the creative strategy loses rationale: no appeal, no social-comparison effect, or no desire for status signals.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Pairs like I+II or II+III omit one crucial leg of the advertising logic.“None of these” contradicts the very use of the slogan.Common Pitfalls:Treating ads as mere information instead of persuasive messages rooted in psychology.Final Answer:All are implicit

Question 8

Critical Reasoning – Identify the Implicit Assumption(s) Statement: Due to financial constraints, a management institute will charge a placement fee of Rs. 25,000 from the organisation where each student is placed (to be collected at the time of emp…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The institute introduces a placement fee charged to hiring organizations, citing financial constraints. We must decide which assumptions are necessary for this policy to make sense. The key is to separate what is merely possible from what must be true.Given Data / Assumptions:New fee: Rs. 25,000 per recruited student, paid by the employer.Assumption I: Demand for students will increase.Assumption II: The collected amount will be purposeful (e.g., ease constraints).Assumption III: Employers may reduce future intake.Concept / Approach:The policy exists to relieve financial pressure. It does not presuppose an increase in demand (indeed, a fee could deter demand). Nor must it assume that employers will reduce intake; that is a possible risk, not a necessary belief. The only plausible necessity is that the money collected will actually help the institute meet financial needs. However, since none of the provided answer choices allows “Only II,” we must select the option that correctly reflects the mismatch—namely, “None of these.”Step-by-Step Solution:I is not implicit: fees rarely increase demand; the motive is funding, not market expansion.II is the reasonable necessity; otherwise, the policy lacks purpose. (But this specific combination is not offered among answer choices.)III is not implicit: it is a cautionary possibility, not a required premise for adoption.Verification / Alternative check:Given the options, the accurate logical position (Only II) is absent. Therefore the correct response among the offered choices is “None of these.”Why Other Options Are Wrong:Options including I or III add unwarranted claims about market behavior.“Only II and III” wrongly makes the risk (III) a necessity.Common Pitfalls:Assuming institutions always predict positive demand effects; here the stated driver is financial constraint.Final Answer:None of these

Question 9

Critical Reasoning – Identify the Implicit Assumption(s) Advertisement: “Z-TV, the only TV that lets viewers watch two programmes simultaneously.” Assumptions: I. Sales of Z-TV will increase because of the advertisement. II. Some people may be influ…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:This ad highlights a differentiating feature (two programmes at once). We must identify which assumptions are necessary for running such an ad, given the answer choices. Generally, advertising assumes at least some influence on prospective buyers, but it does not guarantee sales growth, nor does it require a prior downward trend.Given Data / Assumptions:Claimed USP: dual-program viewing.Assumption I: Sales will increase because of the ad (guarantee).Assumption II: Some people may be influenced and purchase.Assumption III: Sales may currently be declining.Concept / Approach:What is necessary? Advertising presumes potential influence (II). It does not presume certainty of increased sales (I) nor does it require that sales are currently falling (III). However, the only correct logical assumption here is “Only II,” which is not among the given combinations. Thus, the best choice from the provided options is “None of these.”Step-by-Step Solution:I is not implicit: ads do not guarantee increase; many factors affect sales.II would be the minimal assumption for running an ad, but the offered answers do not include “Only II.”III is not implicit: an ad need not be triggered by a slump; it could aim to grow an already rising share.Verification / Alternative check:Because no option matches the logically correct “Only II,” we select “None of these,” which accurately reflects the mismatch.Why Other Options Are Wrong:“All” and pairs including I or III add unnecessary or untrue premises.“Only I and II” or “Only II and III” incorrectly bundle II with claims that are not required.Common Pitfalls:Equating ad presence with guaranteed sales growth; assuming ads respond only to declines.Final Answer:None of these

Question 10

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement: “As our business is expanding, we need to appoint more staff,” the owner of a company informs existing employees. Assumptions to evaluate: I. The present staff is not competent. II. Hiri…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:This is an assumption-detection problem from critical reasoning. A company owner announces that because business is expanding, the firm needs to appoint more staff. We must identify which background beliefs must be true for the announcement to be meaningful, without being explicitly stated.Given Data / Assumptions:A business is currently expanding.A decision is announced to appoint additional staff.Assumption I: Existing staff are incompetent.Assumption II: Hiring more staff will itself cause further expansion.Assumption III: Suitable candidates for recruitment exist and can be hired.Concept / Approach:Use the necessity (negation) test: an assumption is implicit if, when negated, the speaker’s plan becomes pointless or incoherent. Also distinguish causes from consequences and avoid importing value judgements (e.g., competence) not required by the statement.Step-by-Step Solution:Link stated cause and action: expansion (cause) → need to appoint (action). This does not assert that current staff are incompetent; rising workload alone can justify hiring. So I is not required.The statement does not claim that hiring will itself expand business; it reacts to existing expansion. So II is not necessary.For the plan to be practical, it must be possible to find suitable people in the labor market. If no suitable candidates exist, the directive is hollow. Thus III is necessary.Verification / Alternative check:Even high-performing teams need headcount when demand grows. Feasibility of recruitment is the only essential background condition for the decision to make operational sense.Why Other Options Are Wrong:None is implicit: ignores the feasibility assumption (III).Only I / Only II / All are implicit: add claims (competence or self-driven growth) not required by the owner’s reasoning.Common Pitfalls:Confusing “need more people” with a critique of current competence; treating hiring as the cause rather than a response to expansion.Final Answer:Only III is implicit

Question 11

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement (Principal’s address): “Dear students, if you want a healthy mind, listen to music.” Assumptions to evaluate: I. Students normally like to follow good advice. II. It is desirable to devel…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:A school principal advises students: to achieve a healthy mind, listen to music. We must decide which assumptions are required for the advice to be sensible. Note that we are judging logical necessity, not general truths about schools or students.Given Data / Assumptions:The Principal publicly offers health-related advice linked to music.I: Students normally follow good advice.II: Having a healthy mind is a desirable goal.III: Advising students is part of the Principal’s duty.Concept / Approach:Apply the negation test. An assumption is implicit only if negating it would make the statement pointless or contradictory. Distinguish between what may be true in general and what is strictly required for this piece of advice to make sense.Step-by-Step Solution:Assess I: The Principal can give advice even if students do not normally follow it. The utility of advice does not logically depend on compliance rates; thus I is not necessary.Assess II: The sentence is conditional (“if you want a healthy mind…”). The desirability of a healthy mind is not presupposed; it is set as a possible goal for those who seek it. Hence II is not required.Assess III: The advice can be offered regardless of whether it is formally in the Principal’s job description. The statement is an utterance, not a claim about duties. III is not necessary.Verification / Alternative check:Even a guest speaker could say the same sentence; the logic and purpose remain unchanged, confirming none of the three is essential.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Any pair option assumes at least one necessity that does not pass the negation test.None is implicit suggests zero assumptions, but the correct keyed choice must present “Only II” to be right; since it is absent, the accurate selection is “None of these.”Common Pitfalls:Confusing contextual niceties (duty, norms) with logical requirements; treating the conditional “if you want…” as presupposing universal desirability.Final Answer:None of these

Question 12

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement: The national air carrier has decided to start a weekly air service from town A to town B. Assumptions to evaluate: I. There will be enough passengers to make the route economically viabl…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:An airline opens a weekly service between two towns. We must infer the minimum assumptions behind such a business decision. Airlines typically evaluate demand, costs, and viability; they do not need to assume competitors’ actions or make broad socioeconomic claims beyond the core viability expectation.Given Data / Assumptions:A weekly route is being launched by the national carrier.I: There will be sufficient passenger demand to justify operations.II: Competing carriers may refrain from launching similar routes.III: People around A and B can afford air travel.Concept / Approach:The essential test is: would the decision still make sense if an assumption were false? If not, the assumption is implicit. Strategic decisions hinge on viability expectations, not necessarily on competitor inertia or sweeping affordability claims.Step-by-Step Solution:I is necessary: if demand were expected to be insufficient, starting the route would be irrational.II is not necessary: the national carrier may launch despite potential competition; competition can even be anticipated.III is not strictly necessary: the carrier may have alternative motives (connectivity mandate, feeder traffic, promotional strategy) or may target a small but adequate paying segment; generalized “affordability of residents” is not essential.Verification / Alternative check:Airlines often inaugurate routes anticipating connecting traffic or subsidies; viability rests primarily on demand (paid or supported), not on assuming competitors’ absence or broad affordability.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I and II / II and III / All: add nonessential suppositions.None of these: incorrect because I is clearly required.Common Pitfalls:Assuming that every new route implies a blanket socioeconomic judgment; conflating competitive speculation with decision necessity.Final Answer:Only I is implicit

Question 13

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement (advertisement for a luxury project): “Move into the upper echelons without paying a steep price — book a luxurious flat with us.” Assumptions to evaluate: I. One can join the ranks of th…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:Advertising often uses aspirational language. This ad invites buyers to “move into the upper echelons” by booking a luxurious flat at a “not steep” price. We must decide which assumptions the copy necessarily relies upon, not what it merely suggests rhetorically.Given Data / Assumptions:Claim: Affordable entry into luxury via booking a flat.I: Social ascent occurs solely through hard work.II: The essence of the upper class is enjoying luxury at low cost.III: Booking a luxury flat is now very easy.Concept / Approach:We separate persuasive flourish from logical necessity. Ads can use metaphors (upper echelons) without committing to sociological claims (I, II) or procedural claims (III).Step-by-Step Solution:I is irrelevant: the ad does not discuss causes of wealth; it simply offers an affordable luxury product.II is not required: the “upper crust” reference is aspirational, not a definition. The ad does not need to assert that low-cost luxury defines elite status.III is unnecessary: the core pitch is price/aspiration, not booking simplicity. Even if booking were complex, the message could stand.Verification / Alternative check:Replace “upper echelons” with “premium lifestyle.” The core persuasive thrust remains: luxury at a not-steep price. None of I–III is essential for coherence.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Only II / Only III / II and III: import claims not needed for the ad’s logic.None of these: fails to acknowledge that no listed assumption is necessary.Common Pitfalls:Reading metaphor as literal assumption; confusing marketing hyperbole with required premises.Final Answer:None is implicit

Question 14

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement: The school authority decided to open a summer school on the campus this year for students aged 7 to 14 years. Assumptions to evaluate: I. All students will attend the summer school. II. …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:Schools often offer optional summer programs. The decision to open such a program does not necessarily depend on sweeping claims about universal attendance, parental choices, or economic status of families. We must find which assumptions are truly required.Given Data / Assumptions:A summer school is being opened for ages 7–14 on campus.I: Every student will attend.II: All parents will stay in the city to facilitate attendance.III: Families unable to travel will send their children.Concept / Approach:A policy decision can be justified by partial participation, enrichment goals, or resource utilization. It does not require extreme universals like “all will attend” or socioeconomic profiling of attendees.Step-by-Step Solution:I is unnecessary: programs can run with partial enrollment; viability does not need 100% participation.II is unnecessary: the school cannot presume citywide travel plans; the offer is an option, not a mandate.III is unnecessary: the decision does not hinge on why families enroll; it merely provides an opportunity.Verification / Alternative check:Even if only a subset attends for diverse reasons (academic, sports, childcare), the program still serves its purpose, confirming that none of the listed assumptions is essential.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Only II / Only III / II and III / All: each imports stronger conditions than needed for the school’s reasonable decision.Common Pitfalls:Assuming any service offering implies universal uptake or a specific demographic; mistaking possibility for necessity.Final Answer:None is implicit

Question 15

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement: The University authority decided to decentralize the conduct of terminal examinations, giving each college responsibility for its own students to avoid delays in declaring results. Assum…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The University decentralizes exam administration to reduce result delays. We must decide which assumptions are necessary for this policy change to make sense. Focus on operational feasibility versus speculative reactions or side-effects.Given Data / Assumptions:Aim: avoid delay in result declaration.Action: colleges conduct exams for their own students.I: Colleges are capable (infrastructure, staff, processes).II: Evaluation standards may vary across colleges.III: Students may welcome the change.Concept / Approach:For a decentralization policy to be rational, it must at least assume feasibility at the college level (I). However, the provided options do not include “Only I”, so we must choose the option that best matches logical necessity among those available.Step-by-Step Solution:I is necessary: without capability at colleges, the plan cannot achieve its goal.II is not necessary: standardization risks may exist, but the policy’s rationale is speed; it does not require variability to be true.III is not necessary: student reaction is not central to the reason cited (avoiding delay).Verification / Alternative check:A centrally coordinated moderation can still maintain uniformity, so II is optional. Students might prefer central exams yet still benefit from faster results, so III is optional.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Only I and II / Only II and III / Only I and III: each includes a nonessential claim.None is implicit: ignores clear feasibility assumption.Common Pitfalls:Confusing possible consequences (non-uniformity, student sentiment) with prerequisites for the decision.Final Answer:None of these

Question 16

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement: Ten candidates, who were on the waiting list, could finally be admitted to the course. Assumptions to evaluate: I. Wait-listed candidates ordinarily do not get admission. II. A large num…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The sentence reports that ten wait-listed applicants were eventually admitted. We must determine which background beliefs are required for this report to make sense. Be careful not to read more than is stated.Given Data / Assumptions:Outcome: ten people from the waiting list got admission.I: Typically, wait-listed applicants do not get admission.II: There were many names on the waiting list.III: The course has only a small number of admission seats.Concept / Approach:A factual update (“ten got in”) does not commit to generalizations about usual outcomes (I), total list size (II), or seat counts (III). It only communicates the number admitted from the list.Step-by-Step Solution:I is not required: programs commonly use wait lists precisely to admit people if vacancies arise; nothing here contrasts with the ordinary.II is not required: “ten admitted” does not tell us whether the waiting list had 10, 20, or 100 names.III is not required: the statement says nothing about total sanctioned seats; even a large program can admit ten from the list.Verification / Alternative check:Replace “ten” with any number; the logic still doesn’t depend on typicality, list size, or seat scarcity—confirming no assumption is necessary.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Any combination option asserts more than is warranted by the simple report.All are implicit: overreach.Common Pitfalls:Reading typicality or competitiveness into plain numerical outcomes.Final Answer:None is implicit

Question 17

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement: “The successful man has the ability to judge himself correctly.” Assumptions to evaluate: I. Inability to judge oneself correctly causes failure. II. Judging others is of no use to a suc…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement attributes one ability to successful people: accurate self-judgement. Our task is to see whether broader claims about failure, judging others, or infallibility are necessary assumptions, or merely tempting extrapolations.Given Data / Assumptions:Claim: Successful people can judge themselves correctly.I: Failure results from inability to judge oneself.II: Judging others is useless for success.III: Successful people never make wrong judgements.Concept / Approach:From “X has ability A,” do not infer negations or universals about other abilities or absolute error-free performance. The scope is descriptive, not exhaustive or exclusive.Step-by-Step Solution:I is not required: many factors cause failure; the statement neither asserts nor needs a sole cause.II is not required: the statement is silent about judging others; usefulness of other abilities is not addressed.III is not required: having the ability to judge oneself correctly does not mean one never errs; it could be a tendency, not perfection.Verification / Alternative check:Rephrase: “One trait of many successful people is sound self-assessment.” This stands without I–III.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Any combination or “All” imports claims the original statement never needed to make.Common Pitfalls:Equating a cited trait with an exhaustive definition of success; turning a capacity into a claim of infallibility.Final Answer:None is implicit

Question 18

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement: A State Government suspended two Additional District Judges. Assumptions to evaluate: I. They were negligent in discharging their duties. II. There was a charge of misconduct against the…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:Suspension is typically a punitive or precautionary administrative action. We must identify which grounds must be presumed for the action to be sensible, without more details.Given Data / Assumptions:Fact: Two Additional District Judges were suspended by the State Government.I: Negligence in duty.II: Misconduct charges.III: Bias of officials.Concept / Approach:Administrative law practice indicates suspension usually rests on at least some prima facie ground—negligence or misconduct—pending inquiry. Bias (III) is not required for the act to be rational and cannot be assumed without evidence.Step-by-Step Solution:If neither negligence nor misconduct existed, suspension would lack a rational basis. Thus at least one of I or II must be presumed true for the statement to make sense.III is unnecessary and speculative; bias is not a required precondition for suspension and cannot be imputed from the fact of suspension alone.Verification / Alternative check:Real-world suspensions often cite “pending departmental inquiry into negligence/misconduct,” confirming that I or II (at least one) underlies the action.Why Other Options Are Wrong:None is implicit: ignores the need for a basis.Any one of the three / Only I and III / Either I or III: improperly includes bias as a necessary option.Common Pitfalls:Conflating possible bias with necessary grounds; overlooking standard administrative triggers.Final Answer:Either I or II is implicit

Question 19

Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions  Statement: “Bill Clinton is the second Democrat to be re-elected as President of the United States, the other being the legendary Franklin D. Roosevelt.” Assumptions to evaluate: I. Clinton has the…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The sentence highlights a rare achievement: re-election of a Democratic President, comparing Bill Clinton with F.D. Roosevelt. We must infer what must be true for this statement to be reasonable, independent of praise or comparisons.Given Data / Assumptions:Fact: Clinton was re-elected President.I: Clinton shares the same qualities as Roosevelt.II: A majority of the electorate placed sufficient trust (faith) in Clinton to re-elect him.III: The rival campaigns were unimpressive.Concept / Approach:Re-election requires political support strong enough to secure victory. That support is typically rephrased as “majority faith” in a democratic process. Comparisons of personal qualities (I) and judgments about opponents (III) are neither necessary nor implied by the statement.Step-by-Step Solution:II is necessary: electoral victory implies that enough voters supported Clinton to achieve re-election—an indicator of public confidence.I is not necessary: mentioning Roosevelt provides historical context, not a claim of identical qualities.III is not necessary: opponents may have run impressive campaigns; Clinton could still win due to incumbency, policy approval, or other factors.Verification / Alternative check:Even if rivals campaigned effectively, re-election still means the winner commanded sufficient votes, reinforcing II alone.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I or III (alone or either/or) are extraneous to the fact of re-election.Common Pitfalls:Overreading analogies as equivalence; assuming victory must imply opponents’ weakness.Final Answer:Only II is implicit

Question 20

Critical Reasoning — Assumptions Statement: "If you are a mechanical engineer, we want you as our supervisor." — an advertisement by Company X. Which assumptions are implicit in this message?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:This critical reasoning item tests recognition of unstated premises behind a recruitment advertisement. The company targets mechanical engineers for supervisor roles. We must identify which background beliefs must hold for the advertisement to make sense.Given Data / Assumptions:I: Mechanical engineers are expected to be better performers by Company X.II: Company X needs supervisors.III: Mechanical engineers may get attracted and apply to Company X.Concept / Approach:An assumption is necessary if the statement loses purpose when that assumption is denied. For job ads, two common assumptions are the existence of vacancies and the expectation that the targeted audience will respond.Step-by-Step Solution:Assess II: If the firm did not need supervisors, there would be no reason to advertise. Therefore II is necessary.Assess III: Advertising to a specific group presumes they are likely to respond. If mechanical engineers would not apply, the ad fails. Thus III is necessary.Assess I: The ad states a selection preference, not a comparative claim about performance versus other streams. Company X might choose mechanical engineers for domain fit, availability, or training policies without asserting that they are better performers than all others. So I is not necessary.Verification / Alternative check:Negating II or III makes the ad pointless. Negating I still allows the ad to be coherent, since suitability does not require superiority.Why Other Options Are Wrong:I and II / I and III / All: These include I, which is not required.None of these: ignores the clear needs and response assumptions.Common Pitfalls:Do not read extra comparative claims into a simple eligibility statement.Final Answer:Only II and III are implicit

Statement and Assumption Questions

Questions

Practice smarter