Question 1

Verification of truth – "A book always has ____." Identify the unavoidable component.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Books may omit chapters, pictures, or even a printed contents page, but they must consist of pages (physical or paginated in traditional sense for printed books; exam convention assumes print). Final Answer: Pages

Question 2

Verification of truth – "A clock always has ____." Select the feature assumed in standard exam convention.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Although digital clocks exist, traditional exam convention treats “clock” as an analog timepiece with hands (needles). Batteries and alarms are optional; numbers may be absent on minimalist dials. Final Answer: Needles

Question 3

Verification of truth – "A car always has ____." Choose the part present in all cars.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: We seek a structural component of cars. “Driver” is a person, not a component; “dicky” (trunk) and “bumper” vary in form across models/regions, but a hood/bonnet covering the front or rear engine bay is standard in passenger cars. Final Answer: Bonnet

Question 4

Verification of truth — necessary attribute: A tree always has which of the following?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Verification-of-truth questions ask for an attribute that is always present in the given object or concept, not something that is common, frequent, or typical. For “tree,” we must identify a feature that is structurally essential in all normal cases. Given Data / Assumptions: The term “tree” refers to the biological plant form (a woody perennial with a main stem/trunk), not to special cases like artificial trees or purely metaphorical uses. We consider necessary botanical structure, not seasonal/contingent features. Concept / Approach: Trees are vascular plants with a root system (below ground), a stem/trunk (above ground), and a crown (branches/leaves). Of these, roots are fundamental for anchorage and absorption. Leaves and fruits are common but not universal at all times (e.g., deciduous trees may lack leaves seasonally; many trees do not bear fruit every season). Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify candidates that might fail sometimes (leaves, fruits, branches can be pruned or absent seasonally).2) Recognize the invariant: the root system is essential and present for survival and structural support.3) Select the option that captures the necessary attribute: “Roots.” Verification / Alternative check: If a tree loses leaves (winter) or is a juvenile with no fruit, it remains a tree; if it has no roots (as a living plant), it cannot function as a tree. Thus roots are the reliable invariant. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Branches: Young or pollarded trees may temporarily lack obvious branching. Leaves: Deciduous species shed leaves seasonally. Fruits: Not present on all species or at all times. None of these: Incorrect because “Roots” is always present. Common Pitfalls: Selecting “leaves” due to everyday observation, forgetting seasonal leaf drop. Final Answer: Roots

Question 5

Verification of truth — necessary attribute: An oasis always has what essential feature?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: “Oasis” is a geographic term for a fertile spot in a desert where water is found. The task is to identify the necessary attribute that must be present for the location to qualify as an oasis. Given Data / Assumptions: We use the standard geographical definition: an oasis exists because of water emerging (e.g., spring, well, aquifer-fed area) enabling vegetation. Optional or culturally associated elements (caravans, camels) are not definitional. Concept / Approach: Test each option against the definition: Is it possible to have an oasis without that feature? Only “water” is indispensable. Sand, travelers, or camels may be absent; “sand” is common in deserts but not what constitutes the oasis itself. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Define “oasis”: fertile desert area due to water availability.2) Match options: only “Water” is necessary and sufficient (with context) to define an oasis.3) Choose “Water.” Verification / Alternative check: Remove water → fertility disappears → not an oasis. Remove camels/travelers/sand → can still remain an oasis if water persists. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Travelers/Camels: Historical association, not definitional. Sand: Deserts vary (gravel/rock), and the “oasis” part is defined by water and vegetation. None of these: Incorrect because water is essential. Common Pitfalls: Choosing “Sand” by associating oasis with sandy deserts; the key is water. Final Answer: Water

Question 6

Verification of truth — necessary attribute: A “scenery” (as a visual scene or landscape) always has what essential feature?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Here, “scenery” refers to a visual scene/landscape or its depiction (e.g., in art or stage design). The question asks for a feature that must always be present, irrespective of the particular content (mountain, river) or medium (painting vs. natural view). Given Data / Assumptions: “Scenery” is about the arrangement of visual elements within a view or representation. Specific objects (mountains, rivers) are optional; materials like “paints” apply only to painted representations. Concept / Approach: The essential property of any visual scene is that it comprises an arrangement/organization of elements—i.e., a composition. Whether the scene includes mountains, rivers, plains, or cityscapes, there is always a compositional structure (foreground/background, forms, lines, masses, balance). Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Eliminate medium-specific items (e.g., “Paints”). Not all scenery is painted.2) Eliminate particular content (mountains/rivers). Many valid sceneries lack these.3) Identify the invariant property—organized arrangement: “Composition.” Verification / Alternative check: Consider a seascape, forest, desert, or urban skyline; each differs in content, but all have some arrangement of visual elements—hence composition exists in every case. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Paints: Only for artworks, not for natural scenery. Mountains / Rivers: Optional elements; many scenes have neither. None of these: Incorrect because “Composition” is universal. Common Pitfalls: Equating “scenery” exclusively with mountainous landscapes. Final Answer: Composition

Question 7

Verification of truth — necessary attribute: A cupboard always has what essential part?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: We must decide which component is intrinsic to the very idea of a “cupboard.” Everyday usage distinguishes a cupboard (an enclosed storage cabinet) from open shelving or racks. Given Data / Assumptions: “Cupboard” denotes an enclosed storage piece or recess fitted with doors. Internal configuration (shelves, bolts) varies; contents (clothes) are not definitional. Concept / Approach: Identify what differentiates a cupboard from other storage: enclosure via a door. Shelves may be present but are not mandatory; many cupboards have hanging space or bins. A bolt/lock is optional security hardware. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Exclude contents (“Clothes”)—not definitional.2) Exclude optional hardware (“Bolt”).3) Recognize “Door” as the essential enclosing feature. Verification / Alternative check: Remove the door and the unit becomes an open shelf; with a door, it meets the cupboard definition even without shelves. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Clothes: Cupboards can store many items, not only clothes. Shelf: Some cupboards are for hanging/storage without shelves. Bolt: Optional. None of these: Incorrect since “Door” is required. Common Pitfalls: Assuming shelves are mandatory; design varies widely. Final Answer: Door

Question 8

Verification of truth — always-with relationship: Which of the following is always associated with a bargain?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: “Bargain” refers to a negotiated transaction. The question seeks the element that must always be present whenever a bargain occurs. Given Data / Assumptions: A bargain involves parties agreeing to give something and receive something in return—price concessions, terms, or items. Stylistic or subjective qualities (eloquence, sumptuousness, triviality) are not essential to the act itself. Concept / Approach: Identify the invariant: an act of exchange (goods-for-money, goods-for-goods, or services-for-consideration) under negotiated terms. Without exchange, there is no bargain. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Define “bargain” → negotiated agreement to exchange.2) Map options to definition → only “Exchange” is necessary.3) Select “Exchange.” Verification / Alternative check: Any practical example of bargaining—market haggling, contract negotiation—culminates in an exchange of consideration. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Sumptuousness: Luxury is unrelated to the bargaining act. Triviality: Value can be high or low; not required. Eloquence: Negotiation may be persuasive or terse; eloquence is optional. None of these: Incorrect because “Exchange” is essential. Common Pitfalls: Confusing persuasive style with the core mechanics of bargaining. Final Answer: Exchange

Question 9

Verification of truth — necessary content: A newspaper always has what essential element?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: We are to identify the element that must be present for something to count as a “newspaper,” independent of medium (print/digital), staffing model, or revenue model. Given Data / Assumptions: “Newspaper” is defined by its function—producing and presenting news and related reporting on a regular schedule. Advertising and staffing vary; digital versions may not be literally on paper. Concept / Approach: The core of a newspaper is the dissemination of news. Whether physically printed on paper or published online, the defining content is news. Ads, editors, and even the physical “paper” medium, while common historically, are not logically necessary in all cases. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Check medium dependence: “Paper” fails for digital newspapers.2) Check staffing variability: Publications can operate without a distinct “editor” role named, though most have one; not logically required.3) Identify functional essence: “News.” Verification / Alternative check: Consider a digital news outlet updated hourly: it is a newspaper in function without physical paper; remove news and it is not a newspaper, regardless of ads/editors. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Advertisement: Common but not essential. Editor: Typical role, not definitional. Paper: Historically common, not required today. None of these: Incorrect because “News” is essential. Common Pitfalls: Equating the historical print medium with the modern definition. Final Answer: News

Question 10

Verification of truth — necessary condition: A disease always has what necessary element?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The question targets the logically necessary condition for the existence of a disease. Medical philosophy recognizes that every disease state has an etiology (cause), even if unknown. Given Data / Assumptions: “Disease” encompasses infectious, genetic, metabolic, autoimmune, degenerative, etc. We seek what must exist for a disease to occur, not what often accompanies it. Concept / Approach: Some diseases are incurable (so “cure” is not universal). Treatment (“medicine”) is not always present. Not all diseases are caused by “germs” (pathogens); many are non-infectious. However, every disease has some cause (etiology), whether microbial, genetic mutation, deficiency, trauma, or multifactorial. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Test universality of each option.2) Only “Cause” applies to all disease classes.3) Select “Cause.” Verification / Alternative check: Consider scurvy (deficiency of vitamin C), sickle cell disease (genetic), and influenza (viral). Each has a cause, but not necessarily a cure/medicine at all times, and not all involve germs. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Cure: Not universal. Medicine: Not necessary for the disease to exist. Germs: Only for infectious etiologies. None of these: Incorrect; “Cause” is necessary. Common Pitfalls: Equating “disease” with only infectious disease. Final Answer: Cause

Question 11

Verification of truth — necessary part: A mountain always has what defining feature?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: We must isolate a feature that defines a mountain regardless of climate, latitude, or human presence. Given Data / Assumptions: “Mountain” is a natural elevation of the earth’s surface rising conspicuously and having a summit/peak. Ancillary geographic features (nearby valleys) or climatic conditions (snow cover) are not guaranteed. Concept / Approach: The essential geometric characteristic is a highest point—its peak (summit). Snow may be absent (tropics/low elevation). Rangers are personnel, not a landform feature. Valleys are adjacent low areas and may or may not be present distinctly nearby. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Check invariants: every mountain has a highest point.2) Eliminate contingent or external elements (snow, ranger, valley).3) Choose “Peak.” Verification / Alternative check: Mountains are often mapped by summits; peak naming/coordinates define the mountain’s identity—confirming its universality. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Ranger: Human role, not intrinsic. Snow: Climatic/seasonal. Valley: Possible but not required next to every mountain. None of these: Incorrect because “Peak” is defining. Common Pitfalls: Associating mountains with snow due to iconic imagery. Final Answer: Peak

Question 12

Verification of truth — necessary component: A window always has what?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Unlike “cupboard,” the term “window” is broader and refers to an opening that admits light/air and often allows viewing. The question is which of the listed components a window must always have. Given Data / Assumptions: Windows can be glazed or unglazed, grilled or not, curtained or bare, depending on culture, climate, and design. We are testing universality, not typicality. Concept / Approach: Check each candidate for universal necessity. “Curtain” is decorative/functional but optional. “Panes” (glass) are common but not required; many traditional windows lack glazing. “Grill” is a security element, not universal. Hence none of the given components is mandatory in all windows. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Evaluate “Curtain” → optional furnishing.2) Evaluate “Panes” → design-dependent; not universal.3) Evaluate “Grill” → security feature; not universal.4) Conclude: “None of these.” Verification / Alternative check: Consider vernacular architecture (unglazed openings) or modern designs (frameless openings); the listed parts are not guaranteed. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Curtain/Panes/Grill: Each is optional depending on context. All of these: Overstates necessity; false. Common Pitfalls: Assuming glass panes are definitional; they are prevalent but not logically required. Final Answer: None of these

Question 13

Verification of truth — must-have relationship: A child must have had which of the following?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This item asks for a condition that is necessarily true for the existence of a child, independent of culture, economics, or social circumstances. Given Data / Assumptions: “Child” refers to a human offspring. We are considering biological necessity, not social opportunities or possessions. Concept / Approach: By biological reproduction, every child necessarily has parents (at minimum, a biological mother and father, or donor equivalents). Toys, friends, and formal education are culturally contingent and not guaranteed. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Evaluate each option for universality across all societies and times.2) Only “parents” is universally necessary for a child’s existence.3) Select “parents.” Verification / Alternative check: Even in exceptional reproductive technologies, the concept of parentage (genetic/gestational) persists; friendships, toys, and schooling vary widely. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Toys: Not necessary. Friends: Not guaranteed. Education: Access varies; not universal. None of these: Incorrect since “parents” is necessary. Common Pitfalls: Confusing common childhood experiences with definitional necessities. Final Answer: parents

Question 14

A tree always has which of the following essential parts, regardless of the season or appearance of its leaves and branches?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This verification of truth question asks you to think about what is absolutely essential to the identity of a tree. While many features may commonly be seen in trees, only one option given here is something that a tree must always have in order to exist as a tree. The goal is to separate what is permanent and necessary from what is temporary or dependent on conditions like season, light or health. Given Data / Assumptions: The object in question is a tree. Possible features listed are shadow, leaves, branches and roots. We are asked what a tree always has, that is, a feature that is present as part of its nature. We assume ordinary natural trees, not artificial models or purely decorative structures. Seasonal changes, time of day and health of the tree may affect some features but not others. Concept / Approach: To answer correctly, we need to recall basic biology. A tree is a perennial plant with a trunk and a root system that anchors it and absorbs water and minerals. Leaves may fall seasonally. Branches can be pruned or damaged, yet the organism may still be a tree. A shadow depends on the presence of light and can vanish in darkness. Roots, on the other hand, are structurally essential to a tree’s existence and survival, as they anchor the plant and provide nutrient absorption. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Consider the option shadow. A tree casts a shadow only when there is light. At night or in total darkness, there is no visible shadow, yet the tree still exists. Step 2: Consider leaves. Many trees shed their leaves in autumn or during dry seasons, becoming leafless, but they are still trees. Young or damaged trees may also temporarily have very few or no leaves. Step 3: Consider branches. Some trees can be severely pruned so that only the trunk and a few stubs remain. They can still be classified as trees and may grow new branches later. Step 4: Consider roots. For a plant to function as a tree, it must have a root system that anchors it in the soil and supplies water and minerals. Without roots, the tree cannot survive as a living tree. Step 5: Identify roots as the only feature among the options that is inherently and always part of what makes a tree a tree. Verification / Alternative check: Imagine a tree in different conditions. At night there is no shadow. In winter or a dry season many trees have no leaves. After heavy pruning a tree may temporarily seem to have no branches. In all these cases, we still call the organism a tree. However, if you completely remove its root system, the structure cannot continue to live and function as a tree. The very definition of a tree in botany includes the presence of roots as a fundamental organ, confirming that roots are always present in a living tree. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Shadow depends on external light and is not a physical part of the tree. Leaves are often absent during certain seasons or after damage, yet the tree remains a tree. Branches can be cut back almost completely, while the tree continues to live and regenerate. Common Pitfalls: Many learners quickly choose leaves or branches because they are the most visible parts of a tree in everyday life. However, reasoning questions often focus on necessary conditions rather than common appearances. Another pitfall is forgetting that a shadow is not an inherent part of an object; it is only an effect of light. When dealing with such questions, always think about whether the feature is structurally essential for the object to exist in its usual definition, rather than just something often seen with it. Final Answer: A tree always has roots.

Question 15

A scenery, meaning a scenic picture, painting or view, always has which of the following essential features?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question deals with the concept of scenery, especially in the context of art and visual representation. The word scenery may refer to a natural view, a landscape painting, or stage background. The task is to identify which option represents a feature that must always be present in any scenery, regardless of what particular objects it contains. The focus is on what makes a scenery visually and artistically structured, not on specific natural elements such as rivers or mountains. Given Data / Assumptions: The subject is a scenery, that is, a scenic view or artistic depiction of a landscape. Options include rivers, mountains, paints and composition. We assume scenery can be natural, painted, photographed or stage designed. We are asked which feature is always associated with scenery as such. The correct answer must apply to any scenery, not only to particular examples. Concept / Approach: In visual art and design, composition refers to the arrangement of visual elements within a frame or scene. Whether a scenery contains rivers, mountains, fields, buildings or the sea, there is always some composition: a structured placement of objects, colours and shapes that make the scene meaningful. By contrast, many scenic views do not feature rivers or mountains, and paints are only relevant when the scenery is specifically a painting, not a photograph or real-life view. Composition is therefore the only truly universal feature in the options given. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Consider rivers. Many beautiful sceneries contain rivers, but it is easy to imagine vast plains, deserts or urban skylines that have no rivers at all. So rivers are not always present. Step 2: Consider mountains. Some sceneries focus entirely on plains, forests, oceans or city streets without any mountains. Therefore, mountains are not a necessary part of every scenery. Step 3: Consider paints. Paints are used to create painted sceneries, but scenery can also be seen directly in nature or captured in a photograph or digital image with no physical paints involved. Step 4: Consider composition. Every scenery, whether real or represented in art, involves an arrangement of elements within a visual field. This arrangement is what we call composition. Step 5: Recognise that composition is unavoidable; even a simple view of a sky and a horizon line has a certain composition of elements in space. Step 6: Conclude that composition is the only feature among the options that a scenery must always have. Verification / Alternative check: Imagine a variety of scenic views: a flat grassland under a blue sky, a seashore at sunset, a crowded city street at night and a forest path. Some may have no rivers, no mountains and no paints involved if they are real views or photographs. Despite this, each has a recognisable arrangement of lines, colours, shapes and objects. This arrangement is precisely what composition means in visual terms. Because composition is inherent in any view or scene, it is always associated with scenery, confirming it as the correct choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Rivers and mountains are common scenic elements but not universal. Many beautiful landscapes lack one or both. Paints only apply to painted sceneries and cannot be considered essential to every form of scenery. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes think of typical postcard scenes, imagining rivers and mountains, and quickly pick those options. Others focus on the idea of art materials and choose paints. The key to such questions is to think in terms of what must be present conceptually, regardless of the specific content. Whenever an exam asks what is always associated with a visual concept, composition is a strong candidate because it reflects how things are arranged, rather than which things happen to be present. Final Answer: A scenery always has composition.

Question 16

Some mangoes are yellow. Some Tixo are mangoes. Based on these statements, consider the following conclusions: (i) Some mangoes are green. (ii) Some Tixo are yellow. Which of the following options correctly describes which conclusions logically foll…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This is a classic syllogism and logical reasoning question. Two statements are given about mangoes, their colour and a group called Tixo. From these statements we must judge whether the conclusions about green mangoes and yellow Tixo necessarily follow. The key is to base the answer only on the given statements and not on outside assumptions or everyday knowledge about mangoes in general. Given Data / Assumptions: Premise 1: Some mangoes are yellow. Premise 2: Some Tixo are mangoes. Conclusion (i): Some mangoes are green. Conclusion (ii): Some Tixo are yellow. We do not assume any information about mangoes apart from the two given statements. We do not assume that all mangoes are yellow or that no mango is yellow beyond what is stated. Concept / Approach: In syllogism questions, a conclusion follows only if it is true in every possible diagram or interpretation that satisfies the premises. The statement "some" means at least one and possibly more, but not all. The first premise says only that a subset of mangoes is yellow. The second premise says a subset of the group called Tixo overlaps with the group of mangoes. However, nothing in the premises connects the yellow mangoes directly with those mangoes that are Tixo. Likewise, nothing is said about green mangoes at all, so we cannot claim that some mangoes are green from the given information. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Translate Premise 1: "Some mangoes are yellow" means there exists at least one mango that is yellow. Other mangoes may be of any colour; this is not specified. Step 2: Translate Premise 2: "Some Tixo are mangoes" means there exists at least one Tixo that belongs to the set of mangoes. We do not know its colour from the statement. Step 3: Consider Conclusion (i): "Some mangoes are green." The premises do not mention green at all. Mangoes could be yellow, red, green or some other colour, but since the premises are silent about green mangoes, we cannot say that some mangoes are definitely green. Conclusion (i) does not follow. Step 4: Consider Conclusion (ii): "Some Tixo are yellow." For this to follow, at least one Tixo that is a mango must coincide with the yellow mangoes mentioned in Premise 1. Step 5: It is possible that the Tixo mangoes are yellow, but it is equally possible that the Tixo mangoes are of another colour. The premises do not specify any connection between the yellow mangoes and the Tixo mangoes. Step 6: Since we can draw a diagram where Tixo mangoes are not among the yellow mangoes, Conclusion (ii) is not guaranteed and therefore does not logically follow. Step 7: As neither conclusion must be true in all valid interpretations, the correct choice is that neither (i) nor (ii) follows. Verification / Alternative check: Draw a simple Venn diagram with three sets: Mangoes, Yellow things and Tixo. Place some mangoes in the yellow region to satisfy Premise 1. Place some Tixo inside the Mango circle, but outside the yellow overlap, to satisfy Premise 2. In this diagram, no Tixo is yellow, so Conclusion (ii) fails. Also, the diagram does not force any mango to be green; their other colours are unspecified. Since we can construct such a diagram while respecting both premises, neither conclusion is logically forced, confirming that neither follows. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Saying that only (i) follows is clearly wrong because nothing is said about green mangoes in the premises. Saying that only (ii) follows assumes that Tixo mangoes are among the yellow mangoes, which is not guaranteed by the premises. Saying that either (i) or (ii) follows is also incorrect because we have shown a model in which both fail. Common Pitfalls: Many students assume that because some mangoes are yellow and some Tixo are mangoes, there must be some Tixo that are yellow. This is a classic error of assuming overlap between two overlapping subsets without proof. Another common mistake is to use real world knowledge about mango colours instead of sticking strictly to the statements. In syllogisms, always work with what is given and test conclusions against all possible diagrams that satisfy the premises. Final Answer: Neither conclusion (i) nor conclusion (ii) logically follows from the given statements.

Question 17

Statements: (1) Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius. (2) Water freezes at 0 degrees Celsius. Conclusion: At low pressure, water boils at a lower temperature. How should this conclusion be classified on the basis of the given statements?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This verification of truth question asks you to classify a conclusion in relation to two given scientific statements. The statements describe the boiling and freezing points of water at normal atmospheric pressure. The conclusion introduces an additional condition, namely low pressure, and claims that under low pressure water boils at a lower temperature. The task is to decide whether this conclusion is true, false, probably true or false, or irrelevant on the basis of the given information. Given Data / Assumptions: Statement 1: Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius. Statement 2: Water freezes at 0 degrees Celsius. Conclusion: At low pressure, water boils at a lower temperature. The statements do not explicitly mention pressure; they refer to standard boiling and freezing points. We must judge the conclusion in relation to the statements, not simply from outside scientific knowledge. Concept / Approach: Verification of truth questions often test whether a conclusion can be definitely accepted or rejected on the basis of the given statements. If the statements provide full support, the conclusion is true. If they clearly contradict it, it is false. If the statements are related but do not supply enough information, the conclusion may be classified as probably true or probably false, or as either probably true or probably false when complete certainty is impossible. If the conclusion is completely disconnected from the statements, it is irrelevant. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Interpret Statement 1 as describing the normal boiling point of water at standard atmospheric pressure, which is 100 degrees Celsius. Step 2: Interpret Statement 2 as describing the normal freezing point of water at 0 degrees Celsius. Step 3: Observe that neither statement mentions what happens to the boiling point when pressure changes. Step 4: The conclusion introduces a new condition, low pressure, and claims that water boils at a lower temperature under this condition. Step 5: From the two given statements alone, we cannot derive any rule relating pressure and boiling temperature. They do not confirm or deny the conclusion. Step 6: The conclusion is related to the same subject (water and its boiling behaviour), so it is not irrelevant, but it is not logically forced by the given statements either. Step 7: Without extra information, the conclusion could be true or could be false from the point of view of the given data, so it falls into the category of either probably true or probably false. Verification / Alternative check: From real world science, we know that water indeed boils at a lower temperature when the pressure is reduced. However, the purpose of this reasoning question is not to test physics knowledge directly but to see whether the conclusion follows from the two specific statements provided. Since those statements give only the boiling and freezing points at a particular unspecified but typical pressure, they do not address what happens when pressure changes. Therefore, on the basis of the statements alone, the conclusion remains uncertain. It is clearly connected in topic to the statements, so irrelevant is not appropriate, and it is not definitively true or false from the narrow information given. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Classifying the conclusion as True would incorrectly assume extra scientific knowledge beyond the two statements, which the problem does not authorise. Calling it False would also go beyond the information and contradict actual science. Labeling it Irrelevant is incorrect because the conclusion is about the boiling behaviour of water, which is directly related to the first statement. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to answer purely from school science knowledge and immediately mark the conclusion as true. Another error is to think that anything not clearly supported must be false. Verification of truth questions require careful attention to the exact wording of the statements and to whether they are sufficient to settle the conclusion. When the given information is related but incomplete, it is safer to classify the conclusion as either probably true or probably false, indicating that it cannot be definitively judged from the statements alone. Final Answer: The conclusion is either probably true or probably false on the basis of the given statements.

Question 18

The atmosphere around the earth always has which of the following as an essential component?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question asks you to identify what is fundamentally present in the atmosphere. The term atmosphere in basic science refers to the envelope of gases surrounding the earth. While this gas mixture may contain various components such as oxygen, nitrogen, moisture and dust, the question asks which of the given options is always associated with atmosphere, regardless of place or weather conditions. Given Data / Assumptions: The subject is the atmosphere, meaning the gaseous envelope around the earth. The options are oxygen, air, moisture and dust. We assume standard school-level definitions in environmental science. We must identify a component that the atmosphere must always have to be called an atmosphere. Local variations such as pollution, humidity and composition may exist. Concept / Approach: The atmosphere is defined as a collection of gases, predominantly nitrogen and oxygen, along with small amounts of other gases. This mixture of gases in a given region is usually called air. Oxygen is an important part of air but not the only component, and in some planetary atmospheres oxygen may be negligible. Moisture and dust are variable components; humidity can be extremely low and dust content can vary with location and conditions. Therefore, the term air, meaning the gaseous mixture itself, best represents what the atmosphere must always contain. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Consider oxygen. It is a major component of earth’s atmosphere, but the proportion of oxygen can vary, and in some planetary atmospheres oxygen is nearly absent. The concept of atmosphere does not depend on oxygen alone. Step 2: Consider air. Air is the name given to the mixture of gases present in the earth’s atmosphere. Without air or an equivalent gas mixture, there would not be an atmosphere as normally understood. Step 3: Consider moisture. Moisture in the form of water vapour varies widely with weather and climate, and extremely dry air is still part of the atmosphere. Step 4: Consider dust. Dust and particulates can be present in differing amounts, but a perfectly clean atmosphere without dust is still an atmosphere. Step 5: Recognise that air, the gaseous mixture, is the essential characteristic of atmosphere according to school-level definitions. Verification / Alternative check: Imagine a very dry, clean atmosphere over a polar region. Moisture can be extremely low, and dust content may be minimal, yet the region clearly has an atmosphere. Oxygen could technically be replaced by other gases in a different planet’s atmosphere, and we would still call that envelope an atmosphere. What must remain is a layer of gases—air in the broad sense. This confirms that air is the core concept that is always associated with atmosphere in basic science, even though its precise composition can change. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Oxygen is important on earth, but an atmosphere could theoretically exist without it, and the definition of atmosphere does not demand oxygen specifically. Moisture is not always present in significant amounts and can be nearly absent in very dry conditions. Dust is not necessary for the existence of an atmosphere and can vary greatly with pollution and environmental conditions. Common Pitfalls: Students often select oxygen because they strongly associate it with breathing and life. Others may choose moisture thinking of clouds and weather. The key is to focus on what defines the atmosphere itself, not on what makes it comfortable for humans. In reasoning questions, always distinguish between necessary conditions and common but nonessential features. Here, the necessary feature is the presence of air, the gaseous mixture, rather than any specific gas or additional component. Final Answer: The atmosphere always has air.

Question 19

Statements: Hydrogen is lighter than helium. Hydrogen is lighter than oxygen. Conclusion: Therefore, oxygen is the heaviest of the three gases hydrogen, helium and oxygen. How should this conclusion be classified?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This verification of truth question asks you to evaluate a conclusion about the relative heaviness of three gases, based on given comparative statements. The gases are hydrogen, helium and oxygen. The conclusion states that oxygen is the heaviest of the three. We must judge whether this conclusion is true, false, probably false or something that cannot be determined from the information provided in the statements, focusing strictly on logical consequences rather than external scientific facts. Given Data / Assumptions: Statement 1: Hydrogen is lighter than helium. Statement 2: Hydrogen is lighter than oxygen. Conclusion: Oxygen is the heaviest of the three gases hydrogen, helium and oxygen. No direct comparison is given between helium and oxygen. We must base our judgement on these comparisons only, ignoring any outside scientific tables. Concept / Approach: The statements tell us that hydrogen is lighter than both helium and oxygen. This means hydrogen is the lightest of the three. However, nothing in the statements compares helium and oxygen to each other. Oxygen could be heavier than helium, equal in weight under some units, or even lighter, although the last is unlikely in real life. Logically speaking, when there is no direct or indirect information comparing two elements, we cannot conclude a specific ordering between them. Therefore, whether oxygen is the heaviest cannot be definitively said from the given statements alone. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Interpret Statement 1: Hydrogen is lighter than helium. So helium is heavier than hydrogen. Step 2: Interpret Statement 2: Hydrogen is lighter than oxygen. So oxygen is heavier than hydrogen. Step 3: Combine the two statements. Both helium and oxygen are heavier than hydrogen, making hydrogen the lightest of the three. Step 4: Note that there is no statement comparing helium and oxygen. We do not know if helium is heavier than oxygen or if oxygen is heavier than helium. Step 5: The conclusion claims that oxygen is the heaviest of the three gases. Step 6: To accept this conclusion, we would need evidence that oxygen is heavier than helium, but the statements provide no such evidence. Step 7: Therefore, we cannot logically confirm or deny that oxygen is the heaviest solely from the given statements. Step 8: The safest classification is that we cannot say whether the conclusion is true or false based only on the information provided. Verification / Alternative check: From real-world chemistry, we know that oxygen is indeed heavier than both hydrogen and helium when considering molar mass. However, reasoning questions of this type are designed to test logical inference, not recall of data tables. If we imagine a hypothetical world where helium and oxygen had unknown relative weights but hydrogen was lighter than both, the given statements would still be satisfied. In that scenario, the conclusion about oxygen being the heaviest might or might not be true. Since both possibilities are consistent with the statements, the conclusion cannot be decided on their basis alone. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Labeling the conclusion as True would incorrectly treat external knowledge or an assumption as if it were given in the premises. Calling it False or Probably false suggests we know oxygen is not the heaviest, which again goes beyond the statements. Common Pitfalls: A typical pitfall is to rely on scientific memory and simply choose True, because oxygen has a higher molar mass. Another error is to assume that if something cannot be proven true, it must be false. In logic-based reasoning, inability to prove or disprove often leads to the neutral classification of cannot say. Always check whether the necessary comparison or link is actually present in the given information before accepting a conclusion about relative ordering or magnitude. Final Answer: From the given statements alone, we cannot say whether oxygen is the heaviest of the three gases.

Question 20

Statement: The presence of calcium in milk makes it white. Observation: Rice, too, is white. Conclusion: Therefore, rice also contains calcium. How should this conclusion be classified?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question presents a common reasoning error where a conclusion is drawn based solely on a shared property, in this case colour. The statement says that the presence of calcium in milk makes it white. Since rice is also white, the conclusion claims that rice must also contain calcium. The task is to evaluate whether this conclusion is logically valid and how it should be classified: true, probably true, false or something that cannot be determined from the given information. Given Data / Assumptions: Statement: The presence of calcium in milk makes it white. Observation: Rice is white in colour. Conclusion: Rice also contains calcium. The statement indicates one cause of whiteness in milk, but does not claim that calcium is the only possible cause of whiteness in all substances. We are not given any direct information about the chemical composition of rice. Concept / Approach: The reasoning in the conclusion confuses a specific cause-effect relationship in one context with a general rule. Even if we accept that calcium causes milk to be white, it does not follow that everything white must contain calcium. Different substances can share the same observable property (colour) for entirely different structural or chemical reasons. The argument is an example of the fallacy of affirming the consequent: from "If calcium is present in milk, then milk is white" and "rice is white" it incorrectly concludes that rice has calcium. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Translate the statement about milk into a conditional form: If milk contains calcium, then milk is white. Step 2: Note that this does not say that only calcium can make a substance white. There could be many other reasons a substance appears white. Step 3: Observe that rice is white, but we have no statement connecting rice, whiteness and calcium. Step 4: The conclusion assumes that because milk's whiteness is due to calcium, rice's whiteness must also be due to calcium. Step 5: This is a logically invalid pattern of reasoning. From "A causes B in one case" and "C also shows B", we cannot infer that "C also has A". Step 6: In fact, basic science tells us that rice appears white mainly due to its starch content and structure, not primarily because of calcium. Step 7: Therefore, the argument that rice also contains calcium based on whiteness alone is false as a conclusion. Verification / Alternative check: To see the flaw clearly, consider another example: "The presence of sugar in cakes makes them sweet. Mangoes are also sweet. Therefore, mangoes must contain sugar from cakes." This is obviously wrong, because sweetness in mangoes arises from natural fruit sugars and other compounds, not from cake ingredients. Similarly, whiteness in different substances can arise from different materials and structures. The conclusion about rice having calcium based solely on colour is equally flawed. Therefore, both logically and based on basic scientific knowledge, the conclusion is best classified as false. Why Other Options Are Wrong: It cannot be classified as True, because the reasoning pattern is invalid and the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. Probably true is not appropriate, because there is no strong probabilistic support; whiteness alone does not make calcium content likely. Cannot say is weaker than necessary here, because the argument form is clearly incorrect, and the shared property does not support the conclusion. Common Pitfalls: One common mistake is to assume that sharing a visible property, such as colour, proves a shared internal composition. Another pitfall is to read the initial statement as saying that calcium is the only cause of whiteness in any substance, which it does not claim. Reasoning questions often use this structure to test whether the candidate can distinguish between a specific explanation and an overgeneralised rule. To avoid such errors, always check whether the conclusion simply restates a property of the original subject or improperly extends it to other cases without evidence. Final Answer: The conclusion that rice also contains calcium, based solely on its whiteness, is false.

Verification of Truth Questions