Statement: Multinational fast-food chains have started operations in India after facing many problems; farmer associations say they are ready for competition. Conclusions: I. Farmer associations are not supporting modernization. II. Farmer associations are not ready to compete with multinational companies.
-
AIf only Conclusion I follows
-
BIf only Conclusion II follows
-
CIf either I or II follows
-
DIf neither I nor II follows
-
ENone of these
Answer
Correct Answer: If neither I nor II follows
Explanation
Introduction / Context:The premise has two parts: (1) MNC fast-food chains have begun operations despite initial difficulties; (2) farmer associations state they are ready for competition. We must assess the necessary inferences about farmers’ attitudes.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- MNCs are present (after problems).
- Farmer associations claim readiness to compete.
- No explicit stance on modernization beyond this readiness is provided.
Concept / Approach:Logical necessity depends on what is explicitly stated. Readiness to compete is inconsistent with “not ready,” and it also does not imply a rejection of modernization; being ready could well include adopting modern practices.
Step-by-Step Solution:1) I: “Not supporting modernization” is not stated and contradicts the competitive posture that often entails modernization; hence I does not follow.2) II: “Not ready to compete” directly contradicts the statement that they are ready; hence II does not follow.
Verification / Alternative check:If the statement had asserted resistance to modern practices or unwillingness to compete, either I or II might follow. It asserts the opposite.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:Only I/Only II/Either: each conflicts with the stated readiness. “Neither” correctly reflects the premise.
Common Pitfalls:Projecting stereotyped attitudes toward modernization onto the associations without textual support.
Final Answer:If neither I nor II follows