Question 1

Statement–Assumption (Staying Updated via Prime-Time TV News): Statement: “To keep myself up to date, I always watch prime-time news on television,” a candidate tells the interview board. Assumptions: I) The candidate does not read newspapers. II) O…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The speaker claims a preferred method (prime-time TV news) for staying current. Do they thereby assume the absence or invalidity of other methods (newspapers, digital portals, radio)? Only if such exclusion is necessary for the claim. Here we evaluate necessity, not likelihood.Given Data / Assumptions:Statement: Watching TV news keeps the candidate updated.Assumption I: Candidate does not read newspapers.Assumption II: Only TV carries recent news.Concept / Approach:An assumption is implicit only when negating it would undercut the statement. The speaker can prefer TV while also reading newspapers (I not necessary). Likewise, many media carry recent news (web, wire services, radio, print); TV is not presumed to be the only source (II not necessary).Step-by-Step Solution:1) Negate I: The candidate also reads newspapers. The statement about watching TV to stay updated remains coherent.2) Negate II: Other sources also carry recent news. The statement does not claim exclusivity; it reports a personal habit.3) Therefore, neither I nor II is required.Verification / Alternative check:People often use multiple channels for news. A claim “I watch prime-time news to stay updated” is compatible with parallel habits (news apps, newsletters) and does not assert monopoly of recency for TV.Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Only I/Only II/Either/Both” import exclusivity that the statement neither states nor needs.Common Pitfalls:Assuming a chosen method implies rejection of all others; mistaking preference for exclusivity.Final Answer:Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.

Question 2

Statement–Assumption (Brain-Drain to “Greener Pastures”): Statement: “Every year doctors, scientists, and engineers migrate from India to greener pastures.” Assumptions: I) Brain-drain has adversely affected India. II) Better pay scales and higher s…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement describes an observed trend: professionals migrate abroad to “greener pastures.” We must parse what the idiom and the context minimally presuppose. Remember: the task is not to judge policy but to identify the indispensable background belief(s) that make the sentence sensible as stated.Given Data / Assumptions:Trend: Annual migration of high-skilled professionals.Assumption I: The migration harms India.Assumption II: Attractive compensation/quality-of-life factors lure them.Concept / Approach:“Greener pastures” semantically encodes comparative advantage/attraction elsewhere (e.g., better pay, facilities, lifestyle). Thus, II is embedded in the phrasing. By contrast, asserting harm to India (I) is evaluative and not necessary for the descriptive statement: one could report the migration without judging national impact.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Test II: If no attractive pull factors exist, the idiom “greener pastures” loses meaning; II is necessary.2) Test I: The sentence does not state consequences for India; removing the claim of harm does not render the observation incoherent.Verification / Alternative check:Rephrase without evaluation: “Every year professionals migrate abroad for perceived better opportunities.” This preserves the statement while staying neutral about impact on India, confirming I is not required.Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Only I/Both/Either” incorrectly import a value judgment about national loss into a merely descriptive trend statement. “Neither” ignores the baked-in connotation of “greener pastures.”Common Pitfalls:Confusing a widely debated policy issue (brain-drain harms) with what the sentence logically requires to be true.Final Answer:Only Assumption II is implicit.

Question 3

Statement–Assumption (Tourism Promotion in Jammu & Kashmir): Statement: “The Government is making efforts to boost tourism in Jammu and Kashmir.” Assumptions: I) Tourism in Jammu & Kashmir has been unsatisfactory or declining in recent years and nee…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:Policy statements like “making efforts to boost X” typically presuppose that X is not at the desired level and thus warrants intervention. We must separate that necessity from any particular tactic (such as fare discounts), which may or may not be in place.Given Data / Assumptions:Given statement: Government efforts to boost tourism in J&K.Assumption I: Current tourism levels are inadequate or declining enough to merit boosting.Assumption II: A specific measure—railfare discounts—has been announced.Concept / Approach:Negation test again: If tourism were already fully satisfactory, the phrase “making efforts to boost” would be odd or redundant, so I is required. However, the statement does not specify which measures are being used; therefore II is not necessary—many other instruments (marketing campaigns, safety measures, festival circuits, air connectivity) could be deployed.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Test I: Deny inadequacy—tourism is already optimal. Then “making efforts to boost” becomes purposeless; I is necessary.2) Test II: Even if no rail discounts exist, the government can still be making efforts via other channels; II is not necessary.Verification / Alternative check:A government can intend to “boost” a sector for many reasons: seasonality, post-disruption recovery, diversification, or regional development. None requires any particular pre-announced discount scheme.Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Only II” falsely binds the statement to a single tactic. “Both/Either” overstate necessity. “Neither” ignores the basic presupposition behind “boost.”Common Pitfalls:Confusing a general policy intention (boost tourism) with committing to a specific instrument (fare cuts).Final Answer:Only Assumption I is implicit.

Question 4

Statement–Assumption (Changing Fund-Raising Strategy): Statement: “If routine advertisement appeals do not yield the desired response for a fund-raising campaign, appeal to the public’s regional sentiments.” Assumptions: I) When the first strategy u…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement recommends a conditional switch in fund-raising strategy. For this advice to make sense, two beliefs must underlie it: that switching strategies is desirable when results are weak, and that targeted appeals can unlock contributions.Given Data / Assumptions:I: Adopt an alternative if the current strategy underperforms.II: Properly framed appeals cause more people to donate.Concept / Approach:Use the negation test. If shifting tactics were undesirable (negate I), the recommendation collapses. If targeted appeals could not increase giving (negate II), the proposed regional appeal would be pointless.Step-by-Step Solution:1) The clause “if … do not yield the desired response” presupposes openness to alternatives (I).2) “Appeal to … regional sentiments” presupposes that such appeals can improve donations (II).3) Both I and II are therefore necessary.Verification / Alternative check:Campaign design frameworks (A/B testing, message–audience fit) rely on the same logic: iterate strategies and use targeted messaging to move outcomes.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Only I or Only II leaves the recommendation baseless on one side; “Neither/Either” undermines its rationale.Common Pitfalls:Confusing “regional” with “divisive”—the logic is about targeting, not exclusion.Final Answer:Both Assumptions I and II are implicit.

Question 5

Statement–Assumption (Stress on Indian Police): Statement: “The police in India have to cope with tremendous stress and strain while maintaining security and order.” Assumptions: I) Police in other countries do not face stress and strain while doing…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The sentence simply asserts a fact about Indian police workloads. It neither compares with other countries nor states a normative expectation of “stress-free” policing.Given Data / Assumptions:Observed: Indian police face heavy stress.I: Others abroad face no stress.II: Police should perform duties without stress.Concept / Approach:Assumptions must be necessary conditions for the statement’s sense. Comparison with foreign forces (I) is not required. A norm that police should be stress-free (II) is also not required to state a present reality.Step-by-Step Solution:1) Negate I: Even if foreign police are also stressed, the statement about India stands.2) Negate II: Even if stress is expected, the descriptive claim remains valid.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Any option including I or II treats nonessential comparisons or norms as prerequisites.Final Answer:Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.

Question 6

Statement–Assumption (Absence of Local Shopping Complex): Statement: “There is no shopping complex for this colony; people have to go to the main market.” Assumptions: I) The colony may be far from the main market. II) People do not want to go to th…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement reports a fact (no local complex) and its consequence (people go to the main market). It does not comment on distance or on people’s preferences.Analysis:Whether the market is near or far is irrelevant to the necessity of going there.Preference (“do not want to go”) is not implied; compulsion due to lack of facility is enough.Conclusion:Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.

Question 7

Statement–Assumption (Cotton Yield After Improved Seeds): Statement: “The cotton crop continues to be poor even after introducing improved seeds.” Assumptions: I) Improved seeds were expected to increase yield. II) The yield was adequate before the …

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:Using “even after” carries a natural presupposition that the intervention (improved seeds) was expected to help. Hence I is necessary. Nothing is implied about the pre-intervention yield being adequate; the sentence contrasts “poor” with the expectation of improvement, not with prior adequacy. Therefore II is not required.Final Answer:Only Assumption I is implicit.

Question 8

Statement–Assumption (Educational Policy Reform): Statement: “The new educational policy envisages major modifications in the education system.” Assumptions: I) The existing education system is inconsistent with national needs. II) The present educa…

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:Proposing “major modifications” minimally assumes that changes are needed (II). Claim I (“inconsistent with national needs”) is a stronger, specific critique not required by the statement; reforms can be motivated by modernization, efficiency, or alignment—not necessarily by inconsistency with national needs. Hence only II is implicit.Final Answer:Only Assumption II is implicit.

Question 9

Statement–Assumption (Politicians Become Rich by Votes): Statement: “Politicians become rich by the votes of the people.” Assumptions: I) People vote with the intention to make politicians rich. II) Politicians become rich purely by their own virtue.

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:The statement (arguably cynical) attributes wealth accumulation to electoral success. It does not claim that voters intend enrichment (I) nor that enrichment stems from personal virtue (II). Thus neither assumption is necessary.Final Answer:Both Assumptions I and II are not implicit.

Question 10

Statement–Assumption (Theoretical Education & Economic Advancement): Statement: “Theoretical education does not bring economic advancement and leads to a steady loss of confidence and money in the country.” Assumptions: I) Confidence and economic de…

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:The statement asserts two negative outcomes (no economic advancement; loss of confidence and money). It does not require a premise about a close causal tie between confidence and economic development (I), nor does it assume that theoretical education builds confidence (II)—indeed, it suggests the opposite trend. Hence neither I nor II is necessary.Final Answer:Both Assumptions I and II are not implicit.

Question 11

Statement–Assumption (“Too Industrious to Be Poor”): Statement: “He is too industrious to be poor.” Assumptions: I) Very industrious people can also be poor. II) Very lazy people can also be rich.

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:The expression links industriousness with not being poor for this person. It neither asserts that industrious people can still be poor (I) nor makes any claim about lazy people becoming rich (II). Both are extraneous to the given assertion.Final Answer:Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.

Question 12

Statement–Assumption (Long Queue for ODI Tickets): Statement: “A very large number of people stood in the queue to buy tickets for tomorrow’s one-day international match in the city.” Assumptions: I) No other ODI will be played in the city for the n…

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:Large queues imply high demand, not schedule forecasts (I) or supply sufficiency (II). The statement is compatible with multiple future matches and with ticket scarcity. Therefore, neither assumption is necessary.Final Answer:Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.

Question 13

Statement–Assumption (Highway Speed-Limit Boards): Statement: “Highway police put up large boards at regular intervals indicating speed limits and dangers of overspeeding.” Assumptions: I) Most motorists may adhere to speed limits upon seeing such b…

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:Putting up cautionary boards presupposes they can influence behavior (I). Assuming generalized disregard (II) would make the exercise futile; hence II cannot be an implicit premise of the action.Final Answer:Only Assumption I is implicit.

Question 14

Statement–Assumption (Advisory to Beach Shanties in Monsoon): Statement: “The municipal corporation advised people living in shanties along the beaches to move to higher places during monsoon.” Assumptions: I) Many people living in these shanties ma…

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:The advisory aims to induce relocation to safer, higher ground (II). It does not assume inter-city/state migration (I); moving to higher places can occur within the same locality.Final Answer:Only Assumption II is implicit.

Question 15

Statement–Assumption (Shift to Online Examinations): Statement: “Many organisations have switched over to online mode of examinations.” Assumptions: I) Candidates from all parts of the country are well-versed in using computers. II) Online examinati…

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:The statement is descriptive. It neither guarantees universal digital literacy (I) nor asserts superiority in capability filtering (II). Organisations may switch for logistics, cost, or speed, independent of these assumptions.Final Answer:Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.

Question 16

Statement–Assumption (Relocating Factories to Reduce Pollution): Statement: “Government has decided to relocate all factories from the city with immediate effect to reduce pollution.” Assumptions: I) Pollution in the city is caused only by factories…

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:The decision presumes factories contribute significantly to pollution, not that they are the only source (I). It also does not require an assumption about workers’ commuting feasibility (II) to state the environmental intent. Therefore, neither is necessary.Final Answer:Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.

Question 17

Statement–Assumption (Weight Gain After Quitting Smoking): Statement: “Most people who stop smoking gain weight.” Assumptions: I) If one stops smoking, one will gain weight. II) If one does not stop smoking, one will not gain weight.

Accepted Answer

Reasoning:The statement quantifies a tendency (“most”), not a certainty. Assumption I universalises (“one will gain”); Assumption II asserts the contrapositive (“won’t gain if not quitting”). Neither is required to make the “most” claim meaningful.Final Answer:Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.

Question 18

Statement & Assumption — The organization has notified all employees that it will provide transport facilities from the nearby railway station to the office at half the cost. However, employees who already receive a traveling allowance are excluded …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The notice announces a concessional transport facility from a nearby railway station to the office at half cost, excluding those who already receive a traveling allowance. We must identify which hidden assumptions must be true for issuing such a notice to make sense.Given Data / Assumptions:A new or revised facility (half-cost office transport) is being offered.An exclusion is specified (employees with traveling allowance).The medium is a general notice addressed to “all employees.”Concept / Approach:An assumption is implicit only if the announcement would lose its force without it. Broad announcements typically do not presuppose specific uptake proportions, nor do they presume certain employees will fail to read them. The purpose is to inform everyone of eligibility and terms.Step-by-Step Solution:Assumption I: “Most employees will travel by office transport.” This is not required. Even if only a minority use it, a notice is still useful and proper to define terms and exclusions.Assumption II: “Those with traveling allowance will not read the notice.” This is not required. Notices are routinely addressed to all, including ineligible employees, to avoid confusion and to document policy boundaries.Verification / Alternative check:Organizations often publish policies irrespective of expected uptake or readership patterns. The validity of the notice does not depend on either I or II.Why Other Options Are Wrong:Any option that includes I or II as necessary overstates what the notice must assume. The notice merely conveys eligibility and price.Common Pitfalls:Confusing “usefulness” of a facility with a required assumption about “majority usage,” and assuming targeted exclusions imply targeted communication.Final Answer:if neither Assumption I nor II is implicit

Question 19

Statement & Assumption — A bank advertisement states: “Want to open a bank account? Just dial our ‘home service’ and we will come to your doorstep.”  Which assumptions are implicit? I. There exists a segment of people who prefer or require account-o…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The bank promotes a doorstep account-opening “home service.” We test which background beliefs are necessary for this ad to make sense.Given Data / Assumptions:A convenience feature (doorstep onboarding) is being marketed.Target audience: prospects who value home service.Concept / Approach:For such an offer to be rational, the bank must believe that some customers value or need the service (Assumption I). The ad does not require an assumption about overall market competitiveness (Assumption II), even if it is plausibly true in general.Step-by-Step Solution:Assumption I: Necessary—without a home-service-seeking segment, the proposition lacks commercial point.Assumption II: Not necessary—competitive intensity may motivate the campaign, but the ad’s sense does not depend on proving competition.Verification / Alternative check:Even in less competitive markets, convenience features can be offered to attract or enable specific customer groups.Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Either” is too broad; “II only” ignores the direct audience-fit premise.Common Pitfalls:Confusing plausible market context (competition) with a logically necessary assumption for the specific ad.Final Answer:if only Assumption I is implicit

Question 20

Statement & Assumption — “If degrees are delinked from jobs, boys will think thrice before joining college.”  Which assumptions are implicit? I. Students (in general) pursue college education primarily to improve job prospects. II. A degree has no u…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:The statement predicts reduced inclination to join college if degrees are delinked from jobs. We must uncover which assumption makes this prediction reasonable.Given Data / Assumptions:College entry decisions are sensitive to linkage between degrees and employment.“Think thrice” implies deterrence when job linkage is removed.Concept / Approach:Assumption I is necessary: if job prospects were not a primary driver, delinking would not markedly alter the decision calculus. Assumption II (“degree is of no use for getting a job”) is too strong and contradicts the conditional premise; the statement considers a hypothetical delinking, not an absolute uselessness of degrees.Step-by-Step Solution:Affirm I: Explains why delinking reduces motivation—college is pursued for jobs.Reject II: The argument works without asserting absolute uselessness; it only posits removal of formal link, not zero value.Verification / Alternative check:Education decisions often weigh ROI in employment terms—consistent with I.Why Other Options Are Wrong:“II only” misreads the conditional; “either” includes an unnecessary overstatement.Common Pitfalls:Treating a policy counterfactual (“delinked”) as a universal claim of “no value.”Final Answer:if only Assumption I is implicit

Statement and Assumption Questions

Questions

Practice smarter